Yucca Mountain News Clips - Thursday, September 13, 2007

Yucca Mountain News Clips
Thursday, September 13, 2007
---------------------------

Las Vegas Review-Journal
September 13, 2007

Officials suspect 'bait and switch' on Yucca

Skepticism surrounds DOE license application process

By Steve Tetreault
Stephens Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- Nevada officials suspect the Energy Department might be preparing to pull a "bait and switch" when it applies for permission to build a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain, a state leader said Wednesday.

Bob Loux, director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, said Energy Department documents examined by state technical experts indicate that government might be preparing a radically new version of a technically complex license application.

The documents suggest that the application would not be ready in time to meet a June 30 deadline to be sent to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission but might be substituted at some point in place of a version that the Energy Department knows to be flawed, Loux said.

Loux said other documents suggest that new science teams the Energy Department brought in last fall from Sandia National Laboratories found new problems in engineering and data management.

"It might be a bait and switch," Loux said.

"We found documents that suggest the current performance assessment is largely indefensible."

"We are concerned and disturbed by this," Loux said, adding that at this point the state is operating on suspicion and wants the situation investigated further.

Loux outlined the state's views in a letter sent Monday to Dale Klein, chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It was posted Wednesday on the state's Web site.

Asked for comment, Energy Department spokesman Allen Benson wrote in an e-mail to the Stephens Washington Bureau: "The license application will meet NRC requirements." He did not directly address the state's suspicions.

As part of Nevada's efforts to kill the project, state-hired lawyers and engineers are combing thorough a trove of documents that the Energy Department has posted on a Yucca Mountain Web site.

The reviewers look for clues as to the Energy Department's plans and search for ammunition that can be used against the repository, which most state leaders believe will be unsafe and do not want to see built.

In this case, Loux said, the state has discovered references to a "next generation performance assessment" that the Energy Department would refer to after its license request is filed next summer.

"DOE is developing an altogether different version that it considers more defensible but which will not be ready in time," Loux told Klein.

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
September 13, 2007

Second Yucca Mountain contractor announces plans for worker layoffs

Stephens Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- A second major Yucca Mountain contractor confirmed Wednesday that it was preparing layoffs on the nuclear waste project over the next few months.

Fifty-three workers in Las Vegas associated with Sandia National Laboratories face job actions starting in October, spokesman Michael Padilla said.

Of the total, 50 are employed by subcontractors while three are Sandia employees who will be reassigned elsewhere in the New Mexico-based science organization, he said.

Job cuts will include administrative workers and some in the quality assurance branch, Padilla said. Sandia National Laboratories is the lead science and technical group on the project, which is forming plans to establish a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

Earlier this week, officials with Bechtel SAIC, the prime operations contractor at Yucca Mountain, said they were preparing to lay off between 60 and 80 people in the face of anticipated budget cuts. A formal announcement will be made today, DOE officials said.

Likewise, Sandia anticipates a 40 percent reduction in its allocation from the Energy Department for the fiscal year 2008 that begins Oct. 1, Padilla said.

Sandia will be given $75 million for its 2008 budget, while this year it has $123 million, he said.

Yucca Mountain layoffs had been expected.

Ward Sproat, the director of the Energy Department Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, said in March that the Yucca program in 2007 was burning through $100 million in carryover on top of its approved budget of $444.5 million. So even if Congress fully funded the project in 2008, it would come up short for the year, he said.

At the same time it faces budget shortfalls, DOE continues to revise the Yucca work force, favoring technical personnel who are compiling a repository license application that officials have said will be ready by June 30.

"The main thing for this is that we are refocusing our work," Padilla said. "We are focusing now on applying for the license application."

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

KLAS-TV
September 12, 2007

Nevada Goes Back-to-Court to Cut Off Water at Yucca Mountain

Nevada state attorneys are asking a judge order the federal government to stop using the state's water for drilling at the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site. The attorney general's office filed two motions Monday.

The motions ask a judge to force the Department of Energy to cease all water use for all bore hole drilling and in the meantime reach a three-way agreement on appropriate water use at the site.

Last month, U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt upheld the state engineer's decision to deny the federal government the water.

But the DOE said last week that it would continue using water until the first phase of the drilling project is completed by the end of this month.

The state wants the water cut off immediately.

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
September 12, 2007

YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Company preparing layoffs

DOE officials expect budget cuts in Congress

By Steve Tetreault
Stephens Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- Contractors on the Yucca Mountain Project are preparing layoffs for between 60 and 80 workers in anticipation of budget cuts from Congress, officials confirmed on Tuesday.

Notices were expected to be distributed in the next few days to employees of Bechtel SAIC, the chief management company of the Energy Department nuclear waste program based in Las Vegas.

People working in accounting, finance, human resources and other business support departments were being considered for job cuts, company spokesman Jason Bohne said. Bechtel SAIC employs roughly 1,000 people.

Yucca officials confirmed the cutbacks a day after National Security Technologies, a contractor at the adjoining Nevada Test Site, disclosed that at least 200 workers could be laid off in the coming weeks.

In both cases, executives attributed the job threats to uncertainty when or whether Congress will pass a budget this year for the Energy Department.

With a new fiscal year starting Oct. 1, the House has passed a DOE spending bill, but the Senate has not and is not likely to by the end of the month. Without the certainty, DOE officials are telling contractors to tighten up.

In the case of Yucca Mountain, DOE officials expect cuts as large as $100 million below what the project is spending this year, spokesman Allen Benson said.

"The primary driver is the money," Bohne said. "If the money is not there, we have to cut somehow, and for us, that means people."

Bohne said personnel officials in the company, which is a partnership of Bechtel Corp. and Science Applications International Corp., were trying to place workers in other units of the parent firms.

This would be the second round of layoffs at Bechtel SAIC this year, as three dozen people were terminated in March.

The company's work force has fluctuated in recent years as the Yucca program has faced budget pressures and has undergone organizational changes.

Bechtel SAIC laid off about 150 people two years ago.

Last summer, as many as 500 workers were issued job warnings, with many transferring to the payroll of Sandia National Laboratories, which was assigned a larger role on the project.

This week, Sandia National Laboratories was preparing for layoffs, but the number was not expected to match Bechtel SAIC, project officials confirmed. Sandia officials could not be reached on Tuesday.

The Energy Department and its contractors are focusing on compiling data into an application to build a nuclear waste repository at the Yucca Mountain site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

DOE officials have said that the license application is a priority, and that they will have it filed at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by June 30.

Several Nevada federal lawmakers this week said they are trying to find ways to rescue jobs at the Nevada Test Site.

By contrast, they applauded job losses in the Yucca Mountain program, which is politically unpopular in the state.

"The proposed layoffs at Yucca Mountain are a welcomed sign that the repository is losing momentum," said Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev.

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

Las Vegas SUN
September 12, 2007

Layoffs expected at Yucca Mountain with budget cuts

LAS VEGAS (AP) - Contractors on the Yucca Mountain Project are preparing to lay off 60 to 80 workers in anticipation of budget cuts from Congress, officials said.

Notices were expected to be distributed in the next few days to employees of Bechtel SAIC, the chief management company of the Energy Department nuclear waste program based in Las Vegas.

In both cases, executives attributed the job threats to uncertainty when or whether Congress will pass a budget this year for the Energy Department.

Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., applauded the cutbacks for Yucca Mountain program, which is politically unpopular in the state.

"The proposed layoffs at Yucca Mountain are a welcomed sign that the repository is losing momentum," Porter said.

With a new fiscal year starting Oct. 1, the House has passed an Energy Department spending bill, but the Senate is not likely to pass it by the end of the month. Without the certainty, Energy officials are telling contractors to tighten up.

In the case of Yucca Mountain, Energy officials expect cuts as large as $100 million below what the project is spending this year, spokesman Allen Benson said.

This would be the second round of layoffs at Bechtel SAIC this year, as three dozen people were terminated in March.

Bechtel SAIC laid off about 150 people two years ago.

--Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal, http://www.lvrj.com

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

Las Vegas SUN
September 12, 2007

Editorial: It's the waste, stupid

Requests being readied for new nuclear power plants, yet problem is unsolved

Anxious to take advantage of tax credits, loan guarantees, application subsidies and other benefits provided by the 2005 energy bill, many power companies are getting ready to file for permission to build nuclear power plants.

More than 400 people have been hired recently by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to review applications for as many as 29 reactors at 20 sites, mostly in the South.

Stated reasons are plentiful for this spurt of interest in new nuclear power plants after 30 years of dormancy. Generous federal assistance is now available. Electricity demand is growing faster than ever. Coal-fired power plants are in disfavor because their emissions foul the air and contribute to global warming. And, advocates of nuclear power claim, updated designs will make new plants operationally safer, more secure against terrorist threats and less costly to build.

Yet those reasons are not as convincing as they may sound. Federal assistance is generous because the Bush administration is joined at the hip with nuclear power lobbyists. Demand is out of control because leadership in the area of conservation has been sorely lacking. Other energy sources - solar, wind, geothermal - could be replacing coal-fired plants with the right energy policy. And can anyone ever trust a nuclear power plant to be safe and secure?

All of those reasons play into our opposition to new nuclear power plants. But our biggest objection is also the most obvious: In more than 50 years of nuclear power, not even the most brilliant nuclear scientists have solved the problem of securing its deadly waste.

The government's only plan - burying the waste at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas - is so dangerous that it should have been abandoned years ago. Even if only three or four power companies actually commit to building nuclear plants, what is the plan for managing the additional waste?

There is no safe and sane plan. For that reason, there should be no more nuclear power plants.

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

Salt Lake Tribune
September 12, 2007

Nation's nuclear waste storage industry in a jam - and Utah in the spotlight

By Judy Fahys
The Salt Lake Tribune

LAS VEGAS - The nuclear waste industry is preoccupied with one big question these days: What to do with trainloads of low-level nuclear waste that soon won't have anywhere to go.

"This is a national problem, requiring a national solution," said Alan Pasternak, technical director for utilities, academic institutions and other low-level waste generators in California.

And it was a problem that got lots of attention last week at a conference of regulators and contractors in the business of arranging for disposal of radioactive rubbish from reactors, medical tests and procedures and research - not the highly contaminated spent fuel rods.

Utah finds itself at the center of the discussion.

One reason is Salt Lake City-based EnergySolutions, the country's biggest nuclear waste company and operator of a South Carolina nuclear waste site that is being phased out.

Another reason is that EnergySolutions operates the busiest of the nation's three commercial landfills for radioactive waste, in Tooele County, about 80 miles west of Salt Lake City.

EnergySolutions dropped plans to take hotter Class B and C waste in Utah four years ago. Two years after that, the Legislature outlawed the stuff altogether and dashed the hopes of a solution for the storage of low-level radioactive waste from nuclear plants, hospitals, universities and other users of hazardous radioactive material in 36 states.

Those waste generators need new options to dispose of Class B waste, which is composed of leftovers from medical tests and nuclear operations that is gauged to be largely harmless after about 300 years, under the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's classification program. They also want an alternative for Class C waste, which loses its hazard potential after about 500 years.

Under a national system that has been in place nearly two decades, radiologically hazardous Class B and C materials can't go to ordinary landfills but only certified ones - and access to those landfills is tightly limited. No new ones have been constructed since the Tooele County facility, back in 1988.

But the EnergySolutions landfill is not eligible to take the B and C waste. Following a public outcry, the Legislature two years ago outlawed radioactive waste that hazardous, although less dangerous Class A waste is allowed. (Its risk is negligible after 100 years, according to the NRC.)

A disposal site at the old Hanford atomic weapons complex in Washington state also is off-limits to B and C waste from the 36 states because of a federal law that requires waste to be managed within regions. It sets up a kind of fence that provides disposal for radioactive waste generated within region boundaries and serves as a barrier to block waste generated outside the regional fence from coming in.

South Carolina raised hundreds of millions of dollars for its schools by opening its gates to radioactive waste from outside its region. However, with the landfill filling up fast, the state decided several years ago to close it to all but three states in its regional group by June 30.

EnergySolutions petitioned South Carolina lawmakers last spring to keep Barnwell open to outside states but failed.

"We will not be seeking to extend the deadline in South Carolina for accepting out-of-compact waste at the Barnwell facility," said company spokesman Greg Hopkins.

This year, about 35,000 cubic feet of A, B and C waste is headed to Barnwell. Universities, government cleanups, hospitals and reactors are scrambling to find a place for their waste beginning next summer.

The organizations that serve, regulate and represent them swapped ideas here last week for dealing with the disposal crunch in presentations at the RadWaste Summit hosted by Exchange Monitor Publications, which publishes newsletters for the nuclear cleanup industry.

Hopkins said it's important for the nuclear industry to solve the problem in the long run. "It is an issue that the industry is going to have to work together on to resolve," he said.

Some of the options discussed last week in Las Vegas include:

* Storing B and C waste where it is until a disposal alternative is found. A new facility is expected to open in Texas in a few years, and a change in that state's law could make disposal available to the stranded 36 states.

* Minimizing waste by processing it at treatment plants.

* Blending Class B and C waste with less contaminated material to lower its hazard rating to A, so it can go to the Tooele County site.

* Allowing states with federally operated sites to accept some B and C waste from sites with federal ties.

Thomas Laetz, a senior policy analyst with the General Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, told the group the nation could end the gridlock caused by the current multistate, multiagency approach with a comprehensive program for dealing with low-level waste. About one dozen countries rely on them to track volumes and disposal needs, among other management factors, he said.

But Christine Gelles, director of disposal operations for the U.S. Energy Department's environmental management office, questioned if there would be support for changing the current management scheme. She noted that Washington had not taken any actions on the GAO's suggestions about improving radioactive waste management.

She concluded, "It's gonna take the will of Congress."

--fahys@sltrib.com

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

San Francisco Bay Guardian
September 12, 2007

Get your "No more nukes" on

That’s right, break out the picket signs -- your favorite apocalypse is on the reprise. Irvine Rep. Assemblyman Chuck DeVore has introduced legislation to repeal the 31-year ban on new nuclear power plants and launched a ballot initiative. On Sept. 12, the state’s Republican party unanimously voted to support the bill for more nuclear power, which is being touted as safe, clean, reliable, and affordable -- all adjectives the industry has yet to merit.

It's also being called “emissions-free,” a handy moniker for a power source in our globally-warmed future. It's being promoted by pro-clearcutting, pro-GMO "environmentalists" that happen to pull paychecks from the nuclear industry.

Pro-nukes fans are now gathering the 433,000 signatures needed to put the bill on California's June 2008 ballot.

A 1976 California state law banned new nuclear plants until a permanent storage facility for the radioactive waste was established. Meanwhile, said permanent facility – Nevada’s Yucca Mt. -- suffered another setback on Sept. 4 when a federal judge ruled the state could suspend water permits for drilling at the site – further delaying a project that is already seven years overdue.

Spent-fuel nuclear waste is currently stored on the sites of nuclear power plants – which has raised concerns about safety from terrorist attacks. CA Attorney General Jerry Brown recently filed a petition with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, arguing that its waste confidence ruling is inadequate – meaning, we don’t have much faith in your determination that the pools of water where used up nuclear fuel rods bob like swimming pool toys are safe.

--Posted by Amanda Witherell

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
September 11, 2007

Nevada considered for new type of nuke waste

DOE seeks site for decommissioned reactor parts, other materials

By Steve Tetreault
Stephens Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- Already at odds with Nevada over a proposed site to store spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain, the Department of Energy is eyeing the state as a possible destination for another new stream of nuclear waste.

The DOE is proposing to evaluate the Yucca site and the Nevada Test Site for the disposal of decommissioned nuclear reactor parts, encapsulated sources used in medicine and industry, and contaminated debris from laboratory research.

The material is categorized as the most potent type of low-level contamination, potentially as risky as high-level nuclear waste, although their radioactive elements would not take as long to decay and become less dangerous.

Besides the two Nevada sites, the department proposes environmental studies of six other locations and could recommend one or more for disposal of what is called "greater than Class C" waste.

Other sites to be studied are the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico, the Hanford site in Washington state, the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, the Savannah River site in South Carolina, the Idaho National Laboratory and the Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee.

Depending on the disposal strategy and the sites that are selected, the waste could be put in a deep underground repository, in deep bore holes or in near-surface trenches or vaults.

A draft recommendation is expected by spring or summer 2008, project document manager Jamie Joyce said.

Once studies are completed, the Energy Department will report to Congress, but it cannot act further until directed, said Christine Gelles, director of the DOE Office of Disposal Operations.

Besides the proposed Yucca Mountain repository, the Energy Department operates a disposal pit for low-level radioactive waste at Yucca Flat in the northeastern part of the sprawling Nevada Test Site.

Nevada officials already trying to kill the Yucca Mountain repository for high-level nuclear waste have signaled that they also would oppose efforts to ship additional forms of radioactive waste into the state.

"From a policy perspective, we don't want to see any additional waste stream brought into Nevada or the test site of any kind," said Bob Loux, director of the state's Agency for Nuclear Projects.

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., "is closely watching DOE's low-level waste management plans and will do everything in his power to protect the health and safety of all Nevadans," spokesman Jon Summers said.

The Energy Department has held scoping meetings near the potential sites. The proposal got negative reviews at meetings in the Pacific Northwest, while residents of Carlsbad, N.M., the site of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, were most welcoming, according to officials.

A Sept. 4 hearing in Las Vegas drew about 20 people, including a half-dozen speakers, officials said.

At a final scoping meeting Monday in Washington, representatives of nuclear activist groups urged the DOE to perform wide-ranging and deep environmental studies. Some recommended that the material be kept with tight security at current sites.

The material "in many regards is comparable to high-level nuclear waste," said Kevin Kamps of Beyond Nuclear, an activist group.

DOE officials said the amount of radioactive material they are seeking to dispose is relatively small, less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the low-level waste generated. DOE expects that 5,600 cubic meters will require disposal by 2062, roughly enough to cover half a football field to a one-yard depth.

But Gelles said the radioactivity generated by the materials is seven times greater than that of other low-level waste.

Yucca Mountain should be removed from the study list, said Diane D'Arrigo, radioactive waste project director at the Nuclear Information and Resource Service.

"Yucca Mountain isn't close to being licensed, and if it is licensed, it has a capacity problem," D'Arrigo said. "Yucca Mountain should not be on the table. It is a waste of taxpayer money for it to be considered for this."

Because much of the waste would come from nuclear plants, D'Arrigo said, government disposal was "an additional subsidy to the nuclear industry."

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
September 11, 2007

Yucca Mountain: State presses DOE on use of water

Motions seek immediate end of drilling

By Keith Rogers
Review-Journal

Nevada attorneys filed a pair of motions Monday in U.S. District Court in Las Vegas asking a judge to compel the Department of Energy to stop using the state's water for drilling bore holes at the planned Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site.

The motion by Senior Deputy Attorney General Marta Adams asks the court for an order to make DOE "immediately cease its use of water for all bore hole drilling irrespective of 'phase,'" and in the meantime reach a three-way agreement on appropriate water use at the site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt on Aug. 31 denied an emergency motion by lawyers for DOE who wanted him to block State Engineer Tracy Taylor's June 1 order for DOE to stop using Nevada's water for the second phase of its bore hole drilling project.

The DOE sent a letter to Taylor on Thursday saying it had stopped using water for the second phase but would continue using it for the first phase until that phase is completed by the end of this month.

"It should be noted that DOE's letter seems to suggest that it is still within DOE's prerogatives to use water ... even though this court unequivocally determined that DOE's use of water for bore hole activity is not authorized by law and has not been agreed to by the parties," Adams wrote.

She said the DOE's use of water to drill bore holes was never agreed to by the parties regardless of which phase.

The drilling is under way to collect rock samples for data needed for a license application that DOE must submit to federal regulators to construct a nuclear waste repository and above-ground handling and storage facilities.

On Friday, Deputy State Engineer Bob Coache went to Yucca Mountain and observed the DOE using water from nearby wells for the first phase of drilling but not the second phase, a spokesman for the state engineer's office said Monday.

The second motion, filed Monday by Senior Deputy Attorney General Michael Wolz on behalf of the state engineer, asks the court to "direct DOE to cease the use of water for all bore hole drilling."

"There is no legal justification for treating either phase of the drilling program differently from the other" under Hunt's Aug. 31 decision, Wolz wrote.

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
September 11, 2007

Letter: Yucca water

Amid all the rhetoric that goes back and forth about the Yucca Mountain water issue, if you read between the lines you'll find some interesting information that the state authorities and our local congressional delegation don't really want known.

In regard to the accusations that the Department of Energy is "stealing" Nevada's water, what they don't tell you is that all the water being used for the drilling operation is going right back into the ground, within just a few miles, and into the very same groundwater basin as the wells that it was drawn from. The state of Nevada is not losing water to this program at all. It's going right back where it came from, often within hours of being pumped. But the politicians don't really want you to know that.

I find it interesting that, for years, Nevada politicians, press and bureaucrats have loudly proclaimed that "science" shows Yucca Mountain to be a bad site for nuclear waste. Yet all the time they are making these claims, they are working very hard to prevent or shut down the very science that, if their claims were true, would support their arguments. That tells me that they may not be as confident in the science as they want you to think they are.

It's hard to criticize those who advise us not to trust the government. But one thing I've learned over many years regarding this mess is that the federal bureaucracy has no monopoly when it comes to official government dishonesty -- not with the competition they're getting from the government and congressional representatives of Nevada.

David Merritt
Amargosa Valley

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

IdahoStatesman
September 11, 2007

Newsmaker: Interest in nuclear power returns (with audio)

By Ken Dey
kdey@idahostatesman.com

More than 400 experts in the nuclear power field converged on Boise this week for a conference titled Global 2007: Advanced Nuclear Fuel Cycles and Systems. The conference started Monday and continues through Thursday.

Among the speakers Monday was Dale Klein, chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Klein spoke about the challenges the United States will face in rebuilding its nuclear industry. Afterward, he talked to the Idaho Statesman.

Q: What is driving the new interest in nuclear power?

A: What I see from the United States perspective is that there is a major resurgence in nuclear for a variety of reasons. One is the high cost of fossil fuels. The other is global warming. And I think another one is, I believe, the changed regulatory structure. More people now have confidence that the NRC can make timely decisions.

Q: How far away are we from the next new reactor?

A: We will get, probably within the next month, the first new combined operating license (application). We expect this year to get three to five, and more than 10 in the 2008 calendar year. One of issues I try to tell people is that electrons are not going to be flowing next year. It will take the NRC about 30 months to do a tech review of a license application. We do not expect electricity flowing from a new nuclear unit until the 2014 time frame.

Q: We have one nuclear plant proposed by Alternate Energy Holdings (a Virginia company that has never built a nuclear power plant but says it wants to build a 1,600-megawatt one in Owyhee County). Do you have any thoughts on that plant, which would be new and not built on an existing site?

A: There are very few green-field (new) sites that have been discussed. We have had very little conversation with this particular activity. There's only been, I think, two letters sent. Our staff is not engaged. It's not on our radar screens very brightly lit. We're aware of it, but there's not much really happening.

Q: Do you think the public still views nuclear power as dangerous?

A: I think the biggest difference we're going to have with this renaissance is that most of the plants will be built at existing sites. The communities where we've had reactors have now been running 20-30 years, so they're comfortable with them and the scare tactics that came out early on didn't materialize. What's fascinating is that when you ask general audiences, ‘What are the two nuclear accidents that occurred in the world?' they'll name them — Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. But if you ask how many people we kill in coal mines a year, they have no clue. For the United States, Three Mile Island injured no one and it was contained. It was an expensive accident for the utility, and we're better off today because of that, but Three Mile Island clearly caused a lack of confidence in industry.

Q: You mentioned in your presentation that if the proposed Yucca Mountain disposal site is approved it would be full almost as soon as it's open. What is the solution to nuclear waste?

A: If you look at most countries with large nuclear programs, they recycle the spent fuel. That significantly reduces the volume of materials to be disposed of. But all countries that have a nuclear program that are looking at disposal are looking at geological disposal. The whole world agrees that ultimately you'll need to find a very stable formation that has been stable for millions of years and therefore will likely be stable in the future and then put the (waste) emplacement in. The NRC is the licensee of Yucca. We're not for or against it, but will make a technical decision once Department of Energy submits the application. They are indicating they intend to submit in June '08.

Q: Can the United States get back on track to again take the leadership role in nuclear power?

A: We were the world leader initially. Most of the world's technology was developed in the United States and a lot of it developed here in Idaho. But other countries have surpassed us. We still have the most reactors per country, 104 running today. But if you look at a country like France, which got the technology from Westinghouse originally, they get about 80 percent of their electricity from nuclear. I'm hoping from the technical perspective that we will become the world's leader. There's no reason we can't, but the heavy manufacturing I think will not be done in the U.S., but done in countries like Korea, China and Japan. One issue we're concerned about as a regulator is that we don't get counterfeit components in the nuclear system. We have a fairly robust inspection program.

Q: What impact does the political climate and the effect of a change of power (from Republican to Democrat) have on the nuclear industry?

A: Whether global warming is technically real is personally not my area, but I can tell you it's politically real. There is a big concern about global warming and a lot of the Democratic leadership has expressed significant concerns about global warming. But at the end of the day, if you're concerned about global warming, one has to look at nuclear. If you look at a 1000-megawatt nuclear plant, it takes about 500 acres. If you look at a 1,000 megawatt solar plant, it takes about 40,000 acres. If you have a 1,000 megawatt wind farm, it's about 150,000 acres. For baseline generation, it's going to come down to coal and nuclear, and we need them both. It's not one or the other. No matter who is in the presidency or in Congress, we need a sound energy program, and it will likely involve nuclear.

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

San Diego Union Tribune
September 10, 2007

Letter from Washington:

Going nuclear over Yucca Mountain

Dana Wilkie

In the newspaper business, there's the “straight news lead” – an introductory sentence or two that should offer the plain, unvarnished facts about the story to follow.

Here's an example:

“The chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee plans a comprehensive hearing on the safety of the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.”

Then there's the lead you might see in a column such as this one. It's a slightly different version of what you just read:

“Sen. Barbara Boxer, the California Democrat who would rather chew worms than watch the nation build a radioactive waste dump in Nevada's desert, will assemble anti-dump experts before her committee to make a case about the depository's flaws.”

Not that we fault Boxer for this approach, because the simple fact is this: Although the issues surrounding construction of the Yucca Mountain dump are hugely technical, enormously complicated and best left to scientists, it is those with a keen political interest in the proposed repository – Boxer, President Bush, lawmakers who want radioactive waste out of their states – who will have the most to say about whether it gets built.

CRUNCH TIME APPROACHES

The Yucca Mountain dump has been decades in the making, but the coming months are a critical time for it. By next summer, the Department of Energy plans to go to the with an application for a construction license. From there, federal regulators will review the case for the dump – the geology, seismology, hydrology, transportation routes, waste canisters and more – to answer questions of great concern to lawmakers such as Boxer.

Can water infiltrate and carry radioactivity to drinking water? How easy might it be for terrorists to attack the facility? Could an earthquake damage waste canisters and release radioactive materials into the environment? Is it possible those canisters might corrode prematurely and expose their radioactive contents within the underground dump?

As the race to submit the license application accelerates, just about every hearing you'll read about – whether it's before Congress or before a regulatory agency – is likely to be too colored by politics to offer impartial answers to those questions.

If Bush could have his way, he would have opened Yucca Mountain yesterday to advance his nuclear-power-dependent energy initiative, which, to be successful, requires a place to store the resulting radioactive waste.

If a dump doesn't open, the courts will continue socking the Department of Energy with heavy penalties for failing to take the waste off the hands of reactor operators. And because the Department of Energy is ultimately answerable to the president, imagine the strings that will be pulled to make Yucca Mountain look as safe as a 6-year-old strapped into a Volvo.

IT'S ALL PERSPECTIVE

Ask just about any lawmaker in Nevada – Democrat or Republican, local councilman or the governor – to opine on the “science” of a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain, and the consensus is that it's really bad for the environment and really, really bad for public health. It is a consensus practically unheard of in such a diverse group of politicians, except when it comes to matters of regional self-interest.

Boxer, who took the reins of the Environment and Public Works Committee after Democrats seized control of the Congress in the last election, has promised that in coming months she will assemble a hearing to examine the safety, health and permitting issues surrounding Yucca Mountain. For context: Boxer is a long and active foe of Yucca Mountain, having voted against it in 2002.

As for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, it's a five-member body led by a Bush appointee who was once assistant to the secretary of Defense for nuclear and chemical and biological defense programs. Another is a former GOP staffer who had a long career at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. And a third once worked for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who would just as soon toss a grenade at the dump site as look at it.

Now that should make for some lively discussions – all of them based purely on science, of course.

Dana Wilkie is a Washington-based correspondent for Copley News Service and a longtime observer of California politics and social issues

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

KLAS-TV
September 08, 2007

DOE 'Thumbs Nose' at Judges Yucca Water Ruling

This week brought another round in the war of water use at the Yucca Mountain Project, but this time, it might end with sanctions or fines against the Department of Energy.

In June, the state barred water for test drilling at the site and earlier this week a judge agreed the state's water should not be used.

But just recently, the DOE issued a statement that dismissed the ruling saying the order does not affect current water use or operations taking place through September.

Friday, the Nevada Nuclear Department spoke out saying the federal government is "thumbing its nose" at the water use restriction ruling.

Bob Loux, with the Agency for Nuclear Projects, said, "The Department of Energy and its lawyers arrogantly believe that they are entitled to do whatever they want, whenever they want it with whatever resource they think is appropriate."

A judge ruled federal agencies must get state authorization for any water use and the state engineer has banned this kind of water use at the Yucca Mountain site.

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
September 07, 2007
Water use, drilling go on

Yucca Mountain site manager rebuffs order

By Keith Rogers
Review-Journal

What began in June as a clear attempt by the state engineer to stop the Department of Energy from drilling boreholes at the planned Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site now appears as clouded as the muddy water that's in the center of the dispute.

At the close of business Thursday, DOE's acting director of the Yucca Mountain Site Operations Office sent State Engineer Tracy Taylor an overnight letter declaring that the so-called first phase of drilling that's been under way this year "is not affected by the cease and desist order (and) is anticipated to conclude by the end of September."

That means DOE intends to use an additional 191,000 gallons of Nevada's water, or more than half of an acre-foot, according to the letter from James W. Hollrith, acting director of the Yucca Mountain Site Operations Office.

That's enough water to supply one household in the Las Vegas Valley for a year.

Hollrith's letter came less than a week after U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt denied an emergency motion by U.S. attorneys representing DOE who sought to block Taylor's June 1 cease-and-desist order.

Taylor's order was temporarily lifted on June 12 and then reinstated on July 20 when Department of Justice attorneys at the time said the conditions were "unacceptable."

Taylor had offered to let the Energy Department use the water for 30 days, but after that "the use of water for any bore hole drilling whatsoever is prohibited," he wrote in a July 16 letter.

That matches the tone of Hunt's 24-page ruling in favor of the state. In essence, his ruling said any DOE use of water for borehole drilling to collect rock samples needed to support a license application for constructing a repository and surface facilities was outside the scope of a court-approved agreement.

The state "faced the unauthorized use of its water, a violation of state water law, a violation of an agreement it entered in good faith, a violation of this court's order authorizing that agreement, and interference with its obligation to its citizens to enforce its laws and preserve its water," Hunt wrote in his Aug. 31 decision to deny the Justice Department's emergency motion.

Hunt's ruling let stand Taylor's June 1 cease-and-desist order. But that order only instructs DOE to "cease and desist the use of water for the second phase of the bore hole drilling project," not the first phase that DOE continued to keep in operation.

Earlier Thursday, Taylor spokesman Bob Conrad said from the state engineer's perspective, "The cease-and-desist is meant to be for water use regardless of whether its Phase 1 or Phase 2."

About two hours later, though, in his letter to Taylor, Hollrith wrote: "DOE has decided to immediately discontinue using water for drilling and boring activities associated with the (Phase 2) borehole drilling program, as provided in your June 1" cease-and-desist order.

Conrad reacted, saying in an e-mail that the state engineer "has not read this letter. However, I can say that we appreciate the DOE halting the use of water" for Phase 2 drilling. ... We will continue discussions with the DOE regarding the use of water for Phase 1 drilling and other purposes."

Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects and a longtime opponent of the Yucca Mountain Project, said, "For every day that goes by they're drilling and collecting data."

"The state engineer can issue a new cease-and-desist order. That's one of the ways to solve it," Loux said. "These guys (DOE officials) are being flagrant in light of the judge's order. We think they're thumbing their nose at the court."

Today, a new chapter in the Yucca water saga will unfold when an inspector from the Nevada Division of Water Resources goes to the site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, to verify compliance with Taylor's cease-and-desist order.

If the inspector is denied access or finds that water is being used to cool and lubricate drill bits or create mud for collecting rock samples, Loux said, then Nevada's attorneys could file an emergency motion of their own with Hunt, asking him to find DOE officials in contempt of a federal order.

Nevada Senior Deputy Attorney General Marta Adams, who represents Loux, said Thursday, "I'm going to explore every option to force DOE to comply with the court's order, which found that borehole drilling is an unauthorized purpose for use of Nevada's water, regardless of which phase it is."

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

Pahrump Valley Times
September 07, 2007

State rejects Nye County water rights applications

By Mark Waite
PVT

Nye County plans to appeal the recent denial of five applications for county water rights in the Amargosa Desert.

The applications were filed Feb. 16, 2000, to appropriate about 18,600 acre-feet of water annually. An acre foot is 326,000 gallons, or enough to serve two families for a year.

State Engineer Tracy Taylor, in his ruling dated July 16, concluded, in denying the five applications, "There is no unappropriated water in the Amargosa Desert hydrographic basin, approval of the applications would conflict with existing rights and approval of the applications would threaten to prove detrimental to the public interest."

The water rights applications were protested by the National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of Energy.

The National Park Service claimed it had senior water rights and the application would diminish the resources of Death Valley National Park. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service expressed concerns over Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge and habitat for endangered species.

The DOE urged the application not be granted until litigation is concluded regarding Yucca Mountain water permit applications, for which the agency claimed it had senior water rights.

Nye County hydrologist Tom Buqo differed with the U.S. Geological Survey over the perennial yield in that basin, which includes Amargosa Valley. The state engineer noted his office typically relies on information provided by the U.S. Geological Survey, which in this case estimated a perennial yield of 24,000 acre feet annually in the basin, 17,000 acre feet discharged by springs in Ash Meadows and 7,000 acre feet from underground water in the Amargosa Desert.

Buqo said the groundwater yield in the basin could be as high as 40,000 to 47,000 acre feet.

Buqo said the past estimates of recharge over the source of water were highly uncertain, and some estimates significantly underestimated recharge from the Spring Mountains and the Sheep Range. Recharge over the Panamint Range has also been ignored or discounted, the county hydrologist stated.

The USGS countered by saying Buqo's calculations overestimated the groundwater "evapo-transpiration" rate in the gravel and pebble soil. The maps were also biased on the high side in terms of the area where the water table is less than 50 feet, according to testimony of the hearing.

"Although numerous new studies have been conducted, none of the cited studies offer a new and convincing value for perennial yield in the Amargosa Desert Hydrographic Basin," the state engineer's ruling states.

In the Nye County Water Resource Plan, released in 2004, Buqo wrote the existing groundwater would be adequate to provide for anticipated needs in Amargosa Valley for the next 50 years if the higher perennial yield of over 40,000 acre feet were accepted by the Nevada Division of Water Resources.

Jim Marble, director of the Nye County Department of Natural Resources, said a two-year study is currently under way to determine groundwater recharge and evapotranspiration in Amargosa Valley.

"We believe that data may support the issuance of additional water rights out there," Marble said. "I wouldn't say it's a dead effort, we can appeal it; we've got more data coming."

The county had hoped to obtain the water rights for future municipal use, Marble said.

The state engineer found evidence indicated the committed water resources for all water rights in the Amargosa Desert Hydrographic Basin were over 62,000 acre feet annually. Committed resources include 24,078 acre feet, not counting 476 domestic wells and the potential for future wells, the state engineer stated.

But the state engineer was more concerned about future growth in Amargosa Valley. Taylor mentioned 27,904 acres of land were available for disposal by the BLM in the hydrographic basin.

The state engineer added, "Nye County is working on an omnibus lands bill to set aside additional land for both community purposes and commercial purposes. With the amount of land that is and will be available for development, the potential for a dramatic increase in the number of domestic wells appears certain."

Buqo is quoted as testifying during the hearing a parceling ordinance, requiring the purchase and dedication of water rights to offset the impact of additional domestic wells created due to parceling, exists in Pahrump Valley.

But the state engineer notes, "The ordinance does not apply to Amargosa Valley, where parceling can occur in a manner that bypasses the subdivision requirements of the Nevada Division of Water Resources."

The state engineer also denied water rights applications filed in October 1993 and October 1996 by Frederick C. and Sandra J. Fellwock and David Mulkey, trustees of the David A. Mulkey Living Trust.

The first was second in priority to applications filed by Amargosa Resources Inc. for 25,000 acre feet of groundwater. The ARI application was to serve 400 homes on 320 acres, which would result in the basin being fully appropriated, the state engineer's ruling stated.

The state engineer noted previous applications to appropriate water for irrigation in the Amargosa Desert were denied. A state engineer's order issued May 14, 1979, designated the Amargosa Desert Hydrographic Basin as a groundwater basin in need of additional administration. All water rights applications on file in the state engineer's office are subject to an analysis.

The state engineer must determine whether there is unappropriated water before granting a request for a new appropriation of underground water. An analysis of the basin's recharge and discharge is used to determine that. The perennial yield is central to that equation, the maximum amount of ground water that can be salvaged each year over the long term without depleting the groundwater reservoir.

In 1996 the forfeiture of water rights in the Amargosa Desert reduced the permitted water rights from 41,400 acre feet to 26,600 acre feet.

Marble said a prior ruling by the state engineer's office denied a Nye County application for water rights on the Nevada Test Site because the county didn't have access to the water. That decision is also being appealed, he said.

In February 2000 Nye County filed a total of 10 applications for water rights totalling 33,000 acre feet in the basins of the Nevada Test Site including Yucca Flat, Mercury Valley, Rock Valley, Jackass Flats and Crater Flats.

Buqo couldn't be reached for comment by press time.

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

Pahrump Valley Times
September 07, 2007

Valley residents share concerns over future

By Mark Waite
PVT

AMARGOSA VALLEY -- Residents who commented last week on the development of the Amargosa Valley area plan said they don't particularly like planning but felt there wasn't much choice.

Amargosa Valley is still sparsely populated, with only 1,386 residents spread over 575 square miles from U.S. Ecology near Beatty east to the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge near Pahrump.

But community activists see the spill-over of development from Pahrump Valley over the hill and complained of being ignored on some planning matters by the Nye County Commission.

J.W. Cunningham, an Amargosa Valley resident since 1999, recalled when town leaders talked about a master plan, but it was scrapped.

"We decided we didn't want to have a plan. That's the reason we live in Amargosa. If I want to have 50 junk cars in my front yard, I'm going to have 50," Cunningham said.

"But let me tell you something, folks, it sounds good, but it ain't going to work. Because we have got people who are coming over that hill," Cunningham said, "They would love to be able to make our plans for us."

Jean Adams, a valley resident for just about as long, concurred: "We really need to come up with a plan because the county is just egging to do it for us, and I think it's real important we have input."

Bruce Crater, a member of the area plan subcommittee, said, "They're certainly putting a lot of development into this area. We need to be looking 50 to 100 years in advance."

But subcommittee member Dave Hall thought 20 years was enough, a time frame that is already specified in the goals of the plan. He said what was eventually passed in the area plan could also be changed "on a week-by-week basis" as the valley develops.

Subcommittee member Andy Gudas said it's not a detailed plan: "This is a general philosophy of how we would like to see the valley develop."

The plan is expected to be ready for consideration by the Amargosa Valley Town Board by its regular meeting in late September and approved by the Nye County Commission after that.

"There are two things we need to look at: protecting the water, the quality of the water, and the roadways," Hall said. "One of the things we have to do is work closely with the state."

The goals are still rather open but may limit future land parcels to a minimum of 2.5 acres if located in the central portions of the valley and encouraging higher density development to be placed on the outer perimeters.

The plan asks that heavy development by federal, state or county government entities on property in the northern part of the valley be discouraged. Such development could, it is feared, have an adverse impact on future water supplies flowing south through the township. That appears to refer to the Yucca Mountain project.

"Anything 10 acres or less probably really ought to have some kind of a graveled access to, number one, minimize the dust," Hall said.

The plan is being prepared with assistance from state planner Kent Canfield, Hall said.

Town activists said a plan could also mean more money.

Hall said Canfield, the state planner, even suggested Amargosa Valley could incorporate to receive money like federal community development block grants, such as Beatty has gained.

"Being that we're a very small populace at this time, we are not a separate entity, we are part of the county. Until we incorporate we don't have that identity," Crater said.

Resident John Basta said when he served on a federal impact board representing Amargosa Valley, during a trip to Carlsbad, N.M., he was informed it wouldn't receive U.S. Department of Energy money unless it had a master plan, and to have a plan it had to have a regional planning commission.

"What we have to do in this plan, we have to be specific about the infrastructure we need or being able to implement those things that the Yucca Mountain program needs. We are within the 50-mile radius," Basta said.

Amargosa Valley could receive some of the payments equal to taxes (PETT) provided by the U.S. Department of Energy, he said.

Bob Regan asked whether the town has made a plan to acquire more town property. Town clerk Shelly Kadrmas said locations for five future fire stations and three ambulance bays have been mapped out and would be requested from the Bureau of Land Management.

Bill Barrackman wants the master plan to include two resolutions the town board passed last year. They would have regulated concentrated animal feeding operations like the Ponderosa Dairy but were rejected by the Nye County Commission.

Kadrmas talked about introducing business registration to keep track of the kind of businesses that would be opening, but not demanding business licenses.

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

Pahrump Valley Times
September 07, 2007

Water rights in Amargosa will have to be donated

By Mark Waite
PVT

TONOPAH -- John Buchanan, a real estate broker with Tri-State Realty in Pahrump, said an amendment to county code requiring the relinquishment of two acre feet of water rights for parcels 4.5 acres or less would stifle development plans in Amargosa Valley.

Nye County commissioners, in enacting the requirement, said Tuesday they were simply trying to get ahead of the effective date of Senate Bill 275, passed in the last legislature, which allows the state engineer to decide the requirements after Jan. 1, 2008.

Buchanan said with an acre foot of water costing about $5,000, it could add a substantial fee to cheaply-priced lots in Amargosa Valley.

Buchanan said he represents a developer who wants to subdivide a 250-acre parcel called Frontier Estates into five-acre and 2.5-acre lots a mile from the Amargosa Valley School. He figures it's an ideal location for the 2,000 employees that will likely work at the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository by 2010, according to the Nye County Gateway Plan.

Coache said Amargosa Valley has 18,000 more acre feet of water rights on paper than the valley receives in its perennial yield.

Amargosa Valley Town Board Chairwoman Jan Cameron suggested under the law the county commissioners could ask that water rights be relinquished to the county instead of the state engineer so they could bank the water rights for future use.

"If you stay at the five acres, you are going to have some severe impacts on communities such as Amargosa Valley. You will virtually stop growth. There are very limited water rights currently available that are not held by the federal government, which has many, or by the dairy," she said.

Cameron complained that someone having to divide up four parcels on five acres of land would have to provide six acre feet of water rights. The original proposal called for a requirement on five gross acres or less, but it was reduced to 4.5 acres at the suggestion of Commissioner Butch Borasky.

Coache said a municipal water system would get credits for the acre feet of water, but he conceded the creation of such a municipal water system in Amargosa Valley probably wouldn't happen in his lifetime.

Senate Bill 275 didn't specify acreage for relinquishing water rights, Coache added.

"It's a one-for-one exchange. You take water rights off the books for each water right created for these domestic wells. The basins over-appropriated, but it stays in balance for the amount of over-appropriation," Coache said. "I'm on the record in Pahrump, saying the relinquishment of water rights for domestic wells should be five or six acre feet. Then you'll start gaining and getting rid of the deficit."

Nye County Commission Chairman Gary Hollis felt the valley had a more abundant supply of water, judging from test wells drilled for the Yucca Mountain project. Coache said Nye County would have to show the perennial yield of the Amargosa Valley is greater than the existing water rights, which would have to be proven with Death Valley groundwater flow models.

Real estate agent Marlene Rogoff said the water right relinquishment shouldn't happen at the time of parceling but when owners are ready to drill a well.

"Until you're actually going to get ready to get the process to drill a well, you're really not going to be using those water rights," Rogoff said.

Real estate agent Michael DeLee, said via email, "This was a top-down, administratively-driven effort neither prompted nor asked for by the citizenry."

DeLee said SB 275 didn't designate any specific basins. He questioned whether Nye County officials had information about stricter state regulations coming down the pike with SB 275.

"Is the county proposing something that goes beyond SB 275?" DeLee asked. "If not, why not just let SB 275 apply, and if it's not broke, why fix it?"

DeLee complained the requirement for relinquishing water rights in Pahrump Valley was 1.12 acre feet per parcel for many years, which equates to using about 1,000 gallons per day. Nye County Manager Ron Williams said the proposal to relinquish two acre feet of water was to keep the requirements for Amargosa Valley equal with the current regulations in Pahrump Valley. The state engineer's office is concerned over rapid parceling of lots in Amargosa Valley.

The bill also affects residents of Ralston Valley and Big Smoky Valley. But Wiliams said, "The state engineer's office is only concerned in Amargosa because of what's going on in Amargosa right now."

The occupation of the people protesting the ordinance didn't escape Commissioner Joni Eastley.

"With the exception of Ms. Jan Cameron, who offered some very salient points, I have only heard from developers who are interested in pursuing projects in Amargosa Valley without apparent regard to protection of our most valuable resources there," she said.

It took a few tries for Borasky to make a motion. Williams convinced commissioners Nye County has a hard enough time managing the water rights it currently has. Borasky eventually amended his proposal to relinquish water rights to the state engineer instead.

Coache said passage of the county ordinance would probably leave the state engineer to conclude nothing has to be done in Amargosa Valley.

"The state engineer and I personally believe that the counties should take care of themselves. I'm not a person that likes excessive government personally," Coache said.

Cameron persuaded commissioners to delay implementing the ordinance until Nov. 5. Williams predicted a rush of parcel map applications, similar to what happened when a similar requirement was instituted in Pahrump.

"It was a big deal, it was very painful. Let me tell you, I had guys throwing maps at me as I was driving out of Pahrump trying to come home," Williams said.

Buchanan said county planners have 60 days to review a parcel map or they are automatically approved. If SB 275 were allowed to take effect Jan. 1 it would've allowed more time for filing maps.

"We're submitting maps yesterday and today as fast as we can," Buchanan said Thursday.

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

KVBC
September 06, 2007

Runaway tanker rekindles Yucca Mountain concerns

Last week a runaway train got a lot of attention in the valley. It was filled with liquid chlorine, which can be hazardous to humans. Had the tanker ruptured, evacuations would have likely been ordered. Thankfully, it didn't come to that.

Union Pacific says it now has new protections to make sure it doesn't happen again. Mitch Truswell shows us a different kind of rail car that may be getting your attention in the near future.

Yucca Mountain may be years away from accepting the nation's nuclear waste. But the Department of Energy has ideas on how to eventually get the waste here. By rail, it'll be housed in specialized containers. Tested to withstand fires, accidents, even an assault by an airplane, the DOE claims.

What many people may not know is that some of the waste, primarily from southern California, may have to go through our valley to get to the repository. By rail, the DOE has drafted a couple of options.

One proposal would bring the shipments through the heart of Las Vegas. It proposes to use the existing tracks that cut through the valley, near the Strip, behind Clark County Headquarters, through downtown, to a new rail line. That new line would then carry the shipment by Indian Springs then to the repository.

Another option would avoid Las Vegas altogether and involve the building of a special rail line from Jean to Yucca Mountain.

If some of the southern California shipments came by truck, again in specialized containers, the DOE has proposed using the 215 to avoid moving the waste through the most heavily populated areas.

The trucks would go past a proposed mall, the Red Rock hotel/casino, and thousands of homes, eventually getting on US 95 for the trip to Yucca Mountain.

Keep in mind it's not liquid nuclear waste. It's been formed into little radioactive pellets. It is the source for power for a nuclear reactor, one of the little pellets generates nearly the equivalent amount of energy as a ton of coal. But coal isn't as potentially toxic on the road as radioactive waste.

We still don't know exactly how many shipments will actually come through the valley. But in light of the concern and questions about last week's chlorine incident, this too may garner a lot of headlines.

Keep in mind, nothing has been decided in terms of which routes might be chosen or even if the waste will be coming through Las Vegas. There are public hearings scheduled on the rail lines this fall. As soon as there announced, we'll pass it on.

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

Las Vegas SUN
September 06, 2007

Nevada to DOE: Hands off water for Yucca Mountain

CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) - Nevada's top water official has put the federal Energy Department on notice to stop using Nevada water to drill bore holes at the planned Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site and let state inspectors confirm compliance.

A letter Wednesday to a top Yucca Mountain site official in Las Vegas follows U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt's refusal on Friday to block a State Engineer Tracy Taylor's June 1 cease-and-desist order on water for the site.

The order, which was temporarily lifted then reinstated on July 20, "is still in full force and effect," Taylor wrote in the letter to Scott Wade, director of the Energy Department's Environmental, Safety and Health Division.

"I ask that you immediately confirm that you have stopped using water ... and that you contact me to make arrangements to allow officials of the Office of the Nevada State Engineer to enter your facilities on Friday," Taylor's letter reads.

The Energy Department got the letter and was formulating a response, said department and Yucca Mountain project spokesman Allen Benson. He declined to say whether water was still being used or if bore hole drilling had been suspended.

The judge ruled the Energy Department violated a court-approved agreement by using Nevada's water to drill to extract rock samples for data project officials say they need to build surface facilities near the mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

The water is used to cool and lubricate drill bits and to make mud for collecting core samples.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission requires data about the potential for earthquakes and floods at the site to be included in a license application for the planned repository that DOE intends to submit by June 2008.

Allen Biaggi, director of the state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, which includes the State Engineer's office, told the Las Vegas Review-Journal for a Thursday report that Hunt's decision "was pretty clear and convincing."

"We want them to confirm to us that they have stopped using the water, and we're going to send somebody down there on Friday to verify," Biaggi said. "I want to make it clear that we're very appreciative that the judge's order upholds Nevada's 103-year-old water law and the state's jurisdiction over the resource."

He said Gov. Jim Gibbons "has taken a strong stand on Nevada's water law in this case and a strong stand against Yucca Mountain."

"We had worked out a way they could use water for certain things. What they're doing with the water at the site was not in that agreement," Biaggi said.

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