Yucca Mountain News Clips
Friday, March 14, 2008
---------------------------

Nevada Appeal
March 13, 2008

DOE to give Yucca Mountain license application in June

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The head of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump project says that despite budget cuts, the Energy Department will meet a self-imposed June deadline for submitting a required license application to build the repository.

Ward Sproat said earlier this year that the June 30 deadline was in jeopardy because Congress cut more than $100 million cut from Yucca Mountain’s 2008 budget at the urging of Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada.

But Sproat told a Nuclear Regulatory Commission conference Thursday that after reviewing the budget, he’s determined the deadline will be met after all.

The NRC will has the responsibility of reviewing the license application and deciding whether to authorize construction of the dump, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

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

AP Google
March 13, 2008

DOE Idea: Going Private With Nuke Waste

By Erica Werner

WASHINGTON (AP) — Energy Department officials trying to promote nuclear power are suggesting that private industry assume some responsibility for the country's nuclear waste.

Edward F. "Ward" Sproat said Thursday that the idea could ensure more stable management and financial support for the long-delayed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump project in Nevada that he manages.

"I do think that providing some sort of an organization with legislative fiat that provides that stability and fixes some of these institutional problems is a good idea," Sproat said after addressing a conference of nuclear regulators. "But it's got to be done right."

He heads the Energy Department's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.

Even Yucca Mountain supporters say stability has been lacking at the 77,000-ton repository planned 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. It is intended as the resting place for the spent reactor fuel and high-level defense waste piling up at power plants and other sites around the country.

Yucca Mountain's most ardent critic, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is in position to engineer annual budget cuts of $100 million or more.

Sproat suggested a public-private partnership modeled on, for example, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the nation's largest public power company. The TVA was created by Congress and has a board of directors appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, but raises its own money and manages its own employees.

A power point briefing prepared for lawmakers by Dennis R. Spurgeon, the Energy Department's assistant secretary for nuclear energy, includes a slide showing a "nongovernmental entity" that would manage nuclear waste disposal and fees from nuclear utilities in concert with a still undeveloped recycling program supported by the Bush administration.

The power point was obtained Thursday by The Associated Press.

Yucca Mountain's opening date has been delayed repeatedly since the original 1998 goal. Sproat had pegged 2017 as the best achievable opening date. But that has slipped and he could not give a new one on Thursday.

He did say that plans to submit a required construction license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by the end of June are back on track, after coming into doubt this year because of Reid's budget cuts.

Meanwhile, liability to taxpayers is surpassing $7 billion because the department contracted with utilities to take possession of their nuclear waste beginning in 1998.

The idea of a public-private partnership to manage Yucca Mountain and other elements of spent fuel disposal has support from the nuclear industry and is garnering some interest on Capitol Hill. But the change would require legislation that also would have to deal with the liability to utilities and dedicating money from a special nuclear waste fund paid into by utilities, according to Sproat. No one thinks that could come about anytime soon.

"A move like that would greatly enhance the chances of success of the Yucca Mountain project and recently Congress is not inclined to enhance the success of the Yucca Mountain project," said Steve Kraft, senior director for used fuel management at the Nuclear Energy Institute.

Reid has long been declaring Yucca Mountain dead and his spokesman said no new plan would change that. "It's hard to privatize something that's not going to be built in the first place," said Reid spokesman Jon Summers.

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

Reuters
March 13, 2008

US DOE says to send nuke waste plan to NRC in June

By Bernie Woodall

LOS ANGELES, March 13 (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Energy will file an application in June to operate its long-delayed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site in Nevada, an agency official said on Thursday.

The controversial nuclear waste dump 90 miles (150 km) northwest of Las Vegas is at least a decade away from opening, if it ever does.

The project faces intense political opposition from U.S. lawmakers like Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who has pledged to block it.

Meanwhile, costs to build the storage facility have soared to at least $70 billion since the project was first envisaged in the early 1980s.

Edward Sproat, head of the DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, on Thursday reaffirmed the agency's plan to send an application to operate the facility to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in June.

The NRC is expected to take four years to weigh the application before it decides whether to allow Yucca Mountain to be built.

The project was to open in 1998 but has been plagued by scientific foul-ups and political stonewalling.

The Bush administration wants to store up to 132,000 tons (120,000 metric tons) of nuclear waste underground at Yucca Mountain.

There is about 59,000 metric tons of spent fuel in the United States, most of it held at nuclear power plant sites. About 2,000 metric tons of nuclear waste is created every year, a figure that is likely to increase if more nuclear power plants open.

With all of the financial and political hurdles, Bob Loux, of Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons' office, said Yucca Mountain will never be built.

"Most observers believe the project is not going to survive much longer despite the DOE filing," said Loux, director of the Agency for Nuclear Projects for Gibbons' office.

The Energy Department said it will press on despite the political hurdles.

"With waste currently in 39 states and 121 temporary locations, the (DOE) is committed to opening Yucca Mountain as the nation's permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel and high level radioactive waste," a department spokeswoman said. (Editing by Christian Wiessner)

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

New London Day
March 13, 2008

Editorial: The Safer Alternative

The state Supreme Court decision unanimously affirming the legality of moving high-level nuclear waste at Millstone Power Station into dry-storage bunkers is welcomed and should bring an end to the dubious legal challenges it has faced for several years.

Longtime anti-nuclear activist Nancy Burton led the legal challenge. Ms. Burton contested a Superior Court decision that allowed the Connecticut Siting Council's decision approving the facility to stand. The Siting Council, she argued, should have considered health risks.

But the state's high court agreed with the Superior Court's interpretation that assessments of the radiological risks rest with the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The Siting Council appropriately reviewed the issues within its jurisdiction — that the storage facility is of proper design, located a safe distance from homes, outside of the flood zone and does not endanger groundwater.

The fact is that spent nuclear fuel — slender rods just a bit thicker than a pencil and filled with highly radioactive pellets — is far safer in the concrete bunkers than in the spent-fuel pools, where it has been stored since Millstone began operating 40 years ago. The reinforced concrete casks are less vulnerable to terrorist attacks, malfunctions and accidents.

Blocking the gradual movement of older fuel rods to the casks would actually make the public less safe.

Long-term storage of nuclear waste was not part of the original plan for Millstone station. Storage pools were a short-term solution. The fuel could stay there a few years until transfer to a national depository. Federal authorities designated Yucca Mountain in Nevada to take the nation's waste. About $5 billion has been spent studying Yucca, but because of political opposition the fuel won't be moved anytime soon, if ever.

Millstone has permission to build 49 storage bunkers and has already moved a small amount of spent fuel. But even when all 49 bunkers are in place, Millstone will need 86 more to contain all the nuclear waste generated through the extended life of the reactors — through 2035 and 2045 for Units 2 and 3, respectively.

On-site storage is certainly not the best solution. The states should demand that the federal government meet its commitment, made before nuclear-plant construction began, to take control of the waste. But until that happens, nuclear plants across the country, including the one in our back yard, must use the best storage option available — dry cask storage.

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

Jackson Free Press
March 12, 2008

100 Years of Waste

by Greg Williamson

You flip a switch, and the light goes on. It’s like magic. It is easy to forget how much impact electricity has, how it allows us to work at night, stay warm, send e-mail around the world and compute our debts. But generating electrical power has other effects. It is still one of the largest sources of air pollution, although—primarily due to emission controls—the levels of most air pollutants are dropping, according to the EPA.

Reducing air pollution and dependence on fossil fuels are common arguments for building more nuclear power plants. Entergy plans to build a second nuclear power plant in Mississippi, and is lobbying the state Legislature to pass a bill allowing them to fund its construction in advance by increasing consumers’ rates. They argue that it is cheaper to pay as you go rather than to finance.

A more complete explanation is that Entergy wants to reduce its investment risk. Despite the tremendous demand for electricity in the United States, a nuclear power plant is a dicey investment. That is why so few plants have been built in the last 20 years. Part of the danger is public aversion to nuclear power, which can slow the building process. Another serious financial hazard is the significantly long-term commitment of waste, which the plant typically stores on-site indefinitely. To add to the problem, at the end of a nuclear power plant’s life, the nuclear reactor itself becomes waste and must either be dismantled and removed to a long-term storage facility or entombed in concrete. The Nuclear Regulatory Agency requires Entergy or any nuclear utility to set aside at least another $300 million for that eventuality and allows up to 60 years to complete the task.

But where does the waste go, and how will it get there? The United States built a long-term repository for high-level radioactive waste in Yucca Mountain, Nev., but the good people of Nevada don’t want it, and who can blame them? It is also a bit of a logistical and public relations nightmare to transport the waste. How are we going to move tons of high-level nuclear waste through the country? Secretly?

Yes, probably, if at all, because of the threat of terrorism and public protest from people who will not want it going through their town.

So, where is the spent nuclear fuel from all those nuclear power plants in the United States and the one current Mississippi plant going now? Absolutely nowhere. As standard practice, it is stored on-site. Virtually every nuclear plant is also, for practical reasons, a nuclear waste storage facility. Spent nuclear fuel rods are too radioactive to be safely moved for at least six months after they are removed from the reactor and, the longer they sit, the less dangerously radioactive they become over time.

But surely, someday, they will be moved, right? Actually, this rarely happens. Plants hardly ever move high-level nuclear waste anywhere because of the high costs, difficult logistics and residents’ unwillingness to accept nuclear waste for permanent storage in their state.

So the rods just stay in place, waiting, waiting, waiting—for the federal government to come up with a better plan.

So, what Entergy wants, in essence, is a down payment for a very long-term relationship with nuclear power and nuclear waste that will extend actively at least 100 years into the future. If the plant does not remove the waste—it may never happen—the relationship is virtually permanent. Entergy and its customers could end up paying for the plant for a long time indeed (unless the plant is sold to Chinese energy conglomerate).

With all those costs extending so far out into the future, it is all the more reason why Entergy wants to get an early start on raising money for it. It is also why Mississippians should take a long hard look at the total costs and long-term impact of the plant before making that down payment.

--Greg Williamson is a former emergency management planner with 10 years experience in state and local hazard mitigation planning.

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

Louisville Courier-Journal
March 11, 2008

Risky coal-for-nukes tradeoff

By Joseph J. Mangano
Special to The Courier-Journal

The Kentucky legislature is considering a proposal to overturn a 1984 ban on building nuclear reactors in the state. Supporters see nuclear power as an important way to reduce dependency on coal for electricity, without adding to the global warming problem. But a coal-for-nukes swap may represent nothing more than replacing one environmental hazard with another.

One problem with nuclear reactors is what to do with the high-level waste they produce. This waste is actually a cocktail of chemicals such as Cesium-137, Iodine-129, Strontium-90 and Plutonium-239, each radioactive and cancer-causing. The waste decays slowly, remaining in dangerous amounts for thousands of years, and must be kept from escaping into the air, water and food supply.

Kentucky banned nuclear plants because the government had yet to find a permanent waste repository. A quarter century later, there still is no permanent repository. The choice of Yucca Mountain in Nevada has run into snags based on safety concerns and would open in 2018 at the very earliest, perhaps never. A Kentucky nuclear plant would likely be saddled with large amounts of waste indefinitely.

Another potential health problem is a large-scale release of radioactivity from a meltdown. Accidents have occurred at several reactors, including the 1986 total meltdown at Chernobyl and the 1979 partial meltdown at Three Mile Island. But in addition to accidents, a terrorist attack could also cause a meltdown. Safe evacuation would be impossible, and local residents would be exposed to toxic radiation, causing many thousands to suffer from radiation poisoning and cancer.

Even if a disastrous meltdown never occurred, a small portion of radioactivity must be released from reactors. This radioactivity enters the human body through breathing and the food chain as gases and tiny metal particles. They kill and injure healthy cells, leading to cancer, and are especially harmful to a fetus, infant and child.

Although it has never had a nuclear power reactor, Kentucky is no newcomer to nuclear plants. The Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant has been enriching uranium for nuclear weapons and reactors since 1952 -- and contaminating the local environment for decades. Interestingly, two sponsors of the legislation to repeal the ban on reactors include Sen. Bob Leeper and Rep. Steven Rudy. Both represent the Paducah area and should be well aware of threats posed by nuclear plants.

Local residents have breathed, drunk or eaten these contaminants, and they may have suffered. In the past quarter century, the death rate in the four closest counties (Ballard and McCracken in Kentucky, Massac and Pulaski in Illinois) is about 9 percent above the U.S. rate for both whites and blacks. This amounts to nearly 3,000 "excess" deaths in a population of only 95,000. The four counties have no obvious health risk, like language barriers, lack of education or extreme poverty, so Paducah must be considered as a potential factor in these high rates.

Kentucky already has the highest cancer death rate of any state in the nation. There is no need to increase cancer risk by introducing a hazardous means of producing electricity. Replacing coal to limit global warming should not be based on another toxic product. Instead, it should feature conservation, more efficient products and safe renewable forms of energy, such as wind, solar and geothermal power, to protect public health.

--Joseph J. Mangano is executive director of the Radiation and Public Health Project, a research and educational group based in New York.

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

NEI
March 11, 2008

New Thinking Needed on Used Fuel Management Policy

A leading think tank called on Congress to address the nation's used nuclear fuel management and give "prompt consideration" to legislation that would help move critical federal programs forward. The Heritage Foundation issued a backgrounder last week on the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2008: Modernizing Spent Fuel Management in the U.S. Here are the recommendations the paper makes:

To modernize spent fuel management in the U.S. and provide the flexibility, clarifications, and autho­rizations needed to move nuclear power forward in the United States, Congress should:

* Set a deadline requiring the Secretary of Energy to submit a repository license applica­tion for the Yucca Mountain repository within the next few months.

* Provide for a phased licensing regime for the Yucca repository that would store spent nuclear fuel, but actively monitor it and keep it available for retrieval. ...

* Remove artificial capacity restraints on the repository. Technology, science, and actual physi­cal capacity should be the primary limiting fac­tors with respect to Yucca's storage capacity.

However, the Yucca Mountain program still faces many challenges and powerful opponents. The Nevada congressional delegation has long opposed Yucca Mountain, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is the program's number one opponent.

Commentator Chuck Muth offers a compelling critique of Nevada's anti-Yucca campaign below:

When It Comes to Yucca, We’re Out of Loux

The state of Nevada’s knee-jerk, one-sided anti-Yucca campaign was again being sold at a forum yesterday, but a funny thing happened on the way to market: Few were buying it.

Some Nevada politicans are likely to remain opposed to Yucca Mountain regardless of the potential benefits to Nevadans in terms of jobs and investments. However, many policymakers and others are calling for the government to help move forward with aspects of the used fuel management program.

Last week, Sen. Pete Domenci (R-N.M.) said at a Senate appropriations subcommittee hearing that the government should implement a nuclear fuel recycling program this year. He noted that the question about used fuel management is "the only thing that stands in the way of maximum acceptance of nuclear power."

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

redOrbit
March 11, 2008

Environmental Mineralogy

By John Rakovan

With all of the news reports of global warming and other environmental troubles facing society today, one might wonder if mineral science has any role to play in solving these problems. It certainly does! Traditionally, the major application of minerals and mineral science has been in the understanding of how rocks form (petrogenesis) and behave. This is essentially the study of the solid part of the earth, or petrology. Mineralogy by its very nature, however, is an interdisciplinary science, as is geology, in which the principles of physics and chemistry are applied to Earth materials. There are numerous other applications of minerals outside the realm of petrology or even geology, and the importance of minerals extends into many areas of scientific and technological pursuit including materials science, environmental science, medicine, biology, and engineering. A series of forthcoming Word to the Wise columns will address modern mineralogy and its application in these diverse disciplines. In this column we explore some of the connections that minerals and mineral science have with our environment and in helping to solve environmental problems facing society today: in other words, environmental mineralogy.

So what exactly is environmental mineralogy? To quote the recently established International Mineralogical Association (IMA) Working Group on Environmental Mineralogy and Geochemistry:

Environmental mineralogy [and geochemistry] is an interdisciplinary field dealing with systems at, or near, the surface of the Earth where the geosphere comes into contact with the hydrosphere, atmosphere and biosphere. This is the 'environment' on which plants and animals (including humans) depend for survival and which can be disrupted by human activity, particularly that associated with exploitation and utilization of Earth's resources. It deals with those systems containing minerals that constitute key environments (modern sediments, soils, atmospheric aerosols, parts of certain micro and macro organisms including the human body). Both pure systems and those contaminated through human activities are considered, and with emphasis on a fundamental (predictive) understanding of such systems at scales which can range from molecular to global. Examples of specific topics within the remit of environmental mineralogy and geochemistry include: release, transport and dispersal of toxic wastes from mining and industry (including the nuclear industry) and the safe containment of such wastes; mineral-based atmospheric aerosols; minerals in the human body; geochemistry and human health; preservation of minerals and rocks in culturally important buildings and artifacts.

Environmental mineralogy is obviously a very diverse subdiscipline of mineralogy, and a comprehensive review of its many aspects is far beyond the scope of this column. To explore the idea to a greater depth, let's look at two applications of environmental mineralogy: (1) remediation of heavy-metal contaminates that are currently in the environment, and (2) the design of solid forms of radioactive waste for stable disposal. Methods for remediation of contaminated sites as well as the disposition of contained waste are two of the most urgent, and potentially costly, environmental problems facing society today (Ewing and Wang 2002; Langmuir 1997).

One significant class of environmental pollutants is heavy metals such as Pb, As, Cd, Cr, and Hg, which are toxic, even at low concentrations, and may act as carcinogens. These may be naturally present, but human activity has greatly increased the flux of biologically available forms of heavy metals in the environment. One of the key concepts in planning an effective remediation strategy for sites that are contaminated with heavy metals (e.g., Pb and As in sediments and soils surrounding smelters) is bioavailability. There are several possible forms (speciation) in which metals can be found in a contaminated sediment. They may be dissolved in ground water (aqueous); they may be adsorbed to the surfaces of minerals, organic compounds, or bacteria; or they may be incorporated into the crystal structures of minerals. If the metals are present in a form that cannot get into plants and animals or is nonreactive (i.e., cannot be metabolized), they are not bioavailable and pose a much lower health risk. This leads to one possible strategy for contaminant remediation. Instead of removing the metals from the environment, the idea is to change their speciation to a stable, nonbioavailable form, such as being incorporated into the crystal structure of a mineral with low solubility. One mineral currently being used in this application is apatite. The anthropogenic formation of apatite in contaminated soils and sediments (sometimes called phosphate-induced metal stabilization, PIMS) is a new and promising method for sequestering metals (including radionuclides) and environmental remediation (Chen et al. 1997; Conca et al. 2000; Bostick et al. 2000). PIMS works by precipitation and incorporation of metals into minerals (most importantly apatite) that do not dissolve or leach over very long time periods. After incorporation, the metals are no longer bioavailable, are far less dispersible, and thus pose a substantially reduced health risk.

Another example of metal sequestration and stabilization is specific to arsenic contamination in ground waters, a major problem worldwide (Vaughan 2006). PIMS may potentially work in this application because As readily enters the apatite structure (e.g., johnbaumite, Ca5(AsO4)3OH, is isostructural with apatite). However, other minerals, including pyrite and scorodite, are also being used to tie up arsenic in unbioavailable forms. In the case of pyrite, its formation can be induced by stimulating the growth of sulfate- reducing bacteria that naturally exist in many environments or by introducing these bacteria if not naturally present. The reduction of sulfate in the presence of Fe, as part of the biological activity of the bacteria, leads to pyrite formation; if As is present in the ground water, it will also be incorporated (Saunders et al. 2001, 2005). The pyrite will remain stable, with As locked into its structure, as long as conditions remain reducing. Methods in which biological activity is used to help with contaminant immobilization or cleanup, such as this, are known as bioremediation.

A related problem is the disposal of industrial waste that is currently contained but in an unfavorable form for disposal (e.g., in aqueous solution). This problem is particularly germane to radioactive waste products from weapons manufacture or spent nuclear fuel. Tractable strategies for the disposal of nuclear waste necessitate development and use of highly durable waste forms. Vitrification, the process of converting a material into a glasslike amorphous solid, has been investigated extensively. More recently, there is an increased interest in the potential of locking radioactive elements from nuclear waste into stable mineral structures and then disposing of these minerals in geological repositories such as the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) outside Carlsbad, New Mexico, or Yucca Mountain in southwest Nevada. The idea is that putting radionuclides into stable mineral structures will greatly decrease the potential of their dispersal in the environment after they are buried, for example, through ground- water movement. Examples of minerals that are being investigated for this purpose are zircon, monazite, and apatite. In any mineral waste form, certain characteristics are desired, including (1) a high capacity for the incorporation of the radionuclides (elements) of concern, as well as selected fission products resulting from their decay; (2) a reasonable chemical durability (e.g., low solubility in natural waters) depending on the geochemical environment for disposal; and (3) a propensity for rapid annealing of radiation damage. Ultimately, scientists may find that the best form of radioactive waste for contained disposal is as constituents in mineral structures.

Mineralogical solutions to environmental problems sometimes involve the transformation of waste into new, usable materials rather than disposal. One example is the conversion of waste materials created in the recycling of paper. During the manufacture of recycled paper products, paper sludge is generated as an industrial waste. Although not a hazardous material, large quantities of paper sludge are disposed of in landfills, creating an environmental problem because of limited landfill capacities, particularly in countries such as Japan where usable land is at a premium. Mineralogists and other scientists (Wajima et al. 2006, 2007) are investigating the potential of converting paper sludge into usable minerals such as zeolites. Once converted, these materials may ultimately find use in other environmental applications such as sorbents for water purification.

Environmental mineralogy is by no means new, but it is certainly seeing an impressive rise in scope and activity. One indication of this is the number of recent books and monographs that review the immense literature and diverse applications of environmental mineralogy. The sidebar lists numerous examples of such review volumes. Recently, both the American Mineralogist and Mineralogical Magazine published special "green" issues that focus on environmental mineralogy. The important role of minerals in many interesting environmental problems makes today a very exciting time for mineralogy. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I thank Bob Cook and Olaf Borkiewicz for their reviews of this manuscript and their helpful suggestions. I also thank Tomasz Marchlewski, Lesley Smith, and Anne Sorling for the use of their images.

Selected Books and Review Volumes on Topics Related to Environmental Mineralogy

* Alpers, C. N., J. L. Jambor, and D. K. Nordstrom, eds. 2000. Sulfate minerals-Crystallography, geochemistry, and environmental significance. RIMG* vol. 40.

* Banfield, J. F., J. Cervini-Silva, and K. M. Nealson, eds. 2005. Molecular geomicrobiology. RIMG vol. 59.

* Banfield, J. F., and A. Navrotsky, eds. 2001. Nanoparticles and the environment. RIMG vol. 44.

* Banfield, J. F., and K. H. Nealson, eds. 1998. Geomicrobiology: Interactions between microbes and minerals. RIMG vol. 35.

* Bish, D., and D. Ming, eds. 2001. Natural zeolites: Occurrence, properties, applications. RIMG vol. 45.

* Burns, P. C., and R. Finch, eds. 1999. Uranium: Mineralogy, geochemistry and the environment. RIMG vol. 38.

* Cabri, L. J., and D. J. Vaughan, eds. 1998. Modern approaches to ore and environmental mineralogy. MAC[dagger] vol. 27.

* Cotter-Howells, J. D., L. S. Campbell, E. Valsami-Jones, and M. Batchelder, eds. 2000. Environmental mineralogy: Microbial interactions, anthropogenic influences, contaminated land and waste management. MSS[dagger][dagger].

* Dove, P. M., J. J. De Yoreo, and S. Weiner, eds. 2003. Biomineralization. RIMG vol. 54.

* Fenter, P., M. Rivers, N. Sturchio, and S. Sutton, eds. 2002. Applications of synchrotron radiation in low-temperature geochemistry and environmental science. RIMG vol. 49.

* Fleet, M. E., ed. 1984. Environmental geochemistry. MAC vol. 10.

* Guthrie, G. D., and B. T. Mossman, eds. 1993. Health effects of mineral dusts. RIMG vol. 28.

* Henderson, G., and D. Baker, eds. 2002. Synchrotron radiation: Earth, environmental, and material sciences applications. MAC vol. 30.

* Jambor, J. L., D. W. Blowes, and A. I. M. Ritchie, eds. 2003. Environmental aspects of mine wastes. MAC vol. 31.

* Kohn, M. L., J. Rakovan, and J. M. Hughes, eds. 2002. Phosphates- Geochemical, geobiological, and materials importance. RIMG vol. 48.

* Lichtner, P. C., C. I. Steefel, and E. H. Oelkers, eds. 1997. Reactive transport in porous media. RIMG vol. 34.

* McIntosh, J. M., and L. A. Groat, eds. 1997. Biological- mineralogical interactions. MAC vol. 25.

* Sahai, N., and M. A. A. Schoonen, eds. 2006. Medical mineralogy and geochemistry. RIMG vol. 64.

* Vaughan, D. J., and R. A. Wogelius, eds. 2000. Environmental mineralogy. EMU[dagger][dagger][dagger] vol. 2.

*RIMG: Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry published by the Mineralogical Society of America and the Geochemical Society.

--MAC: Mineralogical Association of Canada Short-Course volume.

--MSS: The Mineralogical Society Series published by the Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland in association with Kluwer Academic Publishers.

--EMU: The European Mineralogical Union Review volumes.

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

DOE
March 11, 2008

Senior DOE Official to Highlight Yucca Mountain Project Accomplishments and 2008 Priorities

WASHINGTON, DC – On Thursday, March 13, 2008, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Ward Sproat will deliver remarks at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) Regulatory Information Conference in Bethesda, Maryland.  At the Conference, Director Sproat will address the Spent Fuel Storage and Disposal Session where he is expected to highlight Yucca Mountain accomplishments in 2007 and program priorities for 2008.

Yucca Mountain was approved by the Congress and President Bush in 2002 as the site for the Nation’s first permanent spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste geologic repository.  For more information on DOE’s Yucca Mountain Program, visit the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.

WHO: Director of DOE’s Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Ward Sproat

WHAT: Remarks on Yucca Mountain Project accomplishments in 2007 and program priorities for 2008

WHEN:
Thursday, March 13, 2008
8:00AM EDT

WHERE:
Bethesda North Marriott Hotel and Conference Center
Salon A-C
5701 Marinelli Road
Bethesda, MD

The U.S. NRC’s Regulatory Information Conference brings a diverse group of stakeholders together to discuss significant and timely regulatory activities; it serves as a forum for informal, open dialog between the public and the regulatory process.  Learn additional information about the Regulatory Information Conference.

Media contact(s):
Angela Hill, (202) 586-4940

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

NRC
March 10, 2008

ASLB Requests Information from Potential Parties to Yucca Mountain Hearing

A Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is requesting information from potential parties to a possible adjudicatory hearing on Yucca Mountain to help establish case management requirements and procedures to help licensing boards and parties maintain the strict schedule in NRC regulations for any proceeding.

The board, referred to as the “Advisory Pre-License Application Presiding Officer Board,” or Advisory PAPO Board, was established Feb. 13 to promote effective and efficient participation in the Yucca Mountain proceeding. The board will use information from potential parties to make recommendations on the hearing process to the Commission.

Potential parties would include any members of the public; public interest or nuclear industry organizations; or federal, tribal, state or local government entities that wish to introduce or litigate a legal or technical issue in the anticipated high-level waste repository proceeding.

The U.S. Department of Energy is required by law to submit an application to the NRC to construct a geologic high-level waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev. DOE has indicated its intention to submit an application by the end of this summer. The NRC is required by law to complete its review of the application within three years, with a possible one-year extension. To meet this requirement, NRC’s regulations establish a rigorous schedule for an adjudicatory hearing on the application.

The board issued its first request for information March 6, asking potential interveners to estimate the number of contentions they might file, as well as how much time they would need to answer contentions or reply to answers from other parties. The board’s notice and memorandum requesting the information is attached to this press release and will be published soon in the Federal Register. Potential parties are asked to respond by March 24 using procedures outlined in the memorandum.

The Advisory PAPO Board anticipates requesting more information from potential parties as other procedural subjects arise concerning a potential Yucca Mountain hearing. Such requests will be the only opportunities for potential parties to influence the board’s recommendations to the Commission on procedural requirements for the hearing.

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

Reuters
March 10, 2008

Nuclear regulators seek comments on Yucca Mountain

HOUSTON (Reuters) - A Nuclear Regulatory Commission review board seeks information from members of the public interested in setting the direction of a hearing on Yucca Mountain, the long-delayed, high-level nuclear waste repository in Nevada.

The battle over licensing and construction of a long-term geologic waste repository at Yucca Mountain is one challenge to a revival of nuclear-plant construction in the United States.

A board created last month will use information from interested parties to make recommendations on the hearing process to the nuclear agency.

Potential parties include individuals; public interest or nuclear industry organizations; or federal, tribal, state or local government entities that want to introduce or litigate a legal or technical issue in the anticipated high-level waste repository proceeding, the NRC said.

The U.S. Department of Energy has indicated it plans to submit an application to the NRC by the end of the summer to construct a geologic high-level waste repository at Yucca Mountain.

The NRC is required by law to complete its review of the application within three years, with a possible one-year extension, the agency said in a release. To meet this timeline, the NRC regulations establish a schedule for an adjudicatory hearing on the application.

The board issued its first request for information March 6, asking potential interveners to estimate the number of contentions they might file. Potential parties are asked to respond to the current request by March 24.

--(Reporting by Eileen O'Grady; Editing by David Gregorio)

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

Heritage Foundation
March 10, 2008

The Foundry

Heritage Panel on Yucca Concludes That Yucca Remains Top Priority

Nuclear power is emerging as a solution to not only global energy demand but also America’s energy concerns for clean, safe affordable energy. The 104 reactors in the United States alone supply the country with 20% of its electricity. The same reactors also generated nearly 56,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel that remains on site in 39 states. Managing this spent fuel has become the subject of both scientific and political debate.

The Heritage Foundation hosted an event titled, “Yucca Mountain and the Nuclear Renaissance: Assessing the Safety and Viability of a Vital National Asset” to address these points of contention. The event featured keynote speaker Edward F. Sproat III, Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management for the Department of Energy. Following Mr. Sproat was a distinguished panel of three experts with unique, specialized knowledge on the issue of Yucca Mountain. The event can be viewed here.

One point that was repeated amongst the panel was that while recycling spent fuel or placing it in interim storage may have a role to play, America’s focus must remain on opening Yucca Mountain in a timely fashion. Despite whatever other technologies are developed, there is an enduring need for permanent geologic storage.

On the technical side, although there is a significant amount of spent nuclear fuel, it is technologically feasible to manage. There is nothing scientifically barring legislation to open Yucca Mountain. There are volumes of technical data being prepared that attests to the safety of the repository. This data has been generated by numerous sources, including industry as well as local and federal government entities. Moreover, technology is rapidly developing that permits a more thorough understanding of how different recycling and reprocessing applications will affect Yucca’s long-term viability. National Laboratories are studying how to treat spent nuclear fuel and how recycling and a permanent geological repository can work together.

The legislative process is moving forward as well. In January, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) introduced the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2008 (S. 2551) to help to provide the flexibility and clarification for the United States government to set rational policy for managing spent nuclear fuel. As The Heritage Foundation’s Jack Spencer notes, one of the key provisions of the Amendments Act is a phased licensing system for spent nuclear fuel.

He asserts that: "The initial phase would last for 300 years. During this time, spent fuel would be placed in the Yucca repository, remain retrievable, and be actively monitored. The license could be amended through a process that would take place at least every 50 years to take advantage of operational improvements, technolog­ical advances, and safety innovations. The reposi­tory would then be permanently sealed, thus concluding the second and final phase.”

Finally, the panel addressed questions of alternative locations for potential repositories. The conclusion was that a comprehensive vetting process had already taken place that included considerations of 37 other states. For better or worse, the Yucca location was chosen. Now, having spent billions of dollars on Yucca, without any scientific or technical reason to not go forward on the project, it would make little sense to stop the project given its enduring value to the nation.

It is inevitable that permanent geological storage will play a role in closing the fuel cycle; yet, political and public choice hurdles remain. With the potential for new reactor construction in the United States and the 56,000 tons of nuclear waste already sitting in the United States, Yucca Mountain must be a priority in moving forward with commercial nuclear energy.

--Note: This is the author’s analysis of the panel’s conclusions and should not be attributed to any of the panel participants. A link to an archived version of the panel is provided where the panelist’s remarks can be viewed directly.

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

Buffalo News
March 10, 2008

Another Voice / Energy policy

With a safe repository, nuclear power is an answer

By Alan J. Steinberg

In the ongoing discourse and state legislative stirrings related to climate change, greenhouse gas emissions and the consumption of fossil fuels, many participants in the debate have lost sight of the potential of one of our most viable alternative fuel sources — nuclear power.

In 1979, two events — the movie “The China Syndrome” and the accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear energy facility in Pennsylvania — created widespread grave doubts as to the safety of nuclear power. Today, however, nearly three decades removed from those experiences, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has very clearly instituted and maintained safeguards that provide a time-tested, superior level of safety and security.

Nuclear energy is not only safe, it is also green. Nuclear reactors do not produce greenhouse gases or combustion byproducts, and they actually emit less radiation than coal-fired plants. In fact, the majority of their environmental impact consists of the radioactive waste they produce, and therein lies the “rub” for us in the environmental business, as Hamlet might suggest.

A plan to place our nation’s high-level nuclear waste at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Yucca Mountain, Nevada, radioactive waste repository was recently effectively put on hold, waiting for its operators to prepare an application to the NRC for an operating license.

Also, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency currently is considering regulations establishing health and safety standards for the Yucca facility. If the Yucca Mountain repository receives a license from the NRC and complies with the final EPA regulations, then it could constitute the solution for our nation’s high-level radioactive waste.

A safe repository is a vital component of the nuclear energy mix because quite apart from any future expansion of the use of nuclear power, we still need to provide a disposal option for the 104 commercial reactors currently operating in the United States. Ten of those reactors exist in our region.

Our national electricity demand is expected to increase by 50 percent in the next 30 years. The NRC has estimated that to meet that demand, we would need 50 more nuclear reactors just to maintain the same 20 percent of electric power that is currently generated by nuclear energy. So whether you are for or against the expansion of nuclear power, a safe, long-term repository is critically needed.

It is unrealistic to expect wind and solar energy to completely replace coal-fired utility plants. We need to follow Europe’s example and re-energize our nuclear energy program. Nuclear power supplies about 80 percent of France’s electricity demand, as an example. First, however, we must resolve the high-level nuclear waste issue. The Yucca Mountain repository can be a solution to this thorny problem, provided that it meets important health and safety standards.

--Alan J. Steinberg is administrator of Region2 of the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency.

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
March 09, 2008

Speakers play up outlook for GOP

County convention draws record crowd

By Molly Ball
Review-Journal

Clark County Republicans held their convention Saturday, drawing a record crowd for a day of pep talks about the party's prospects in November and disputes about what the party should stand for.

"We've got a problem," Clark County GOP Chairman Bernie Zadrowski told the crowd of more than 3,000 at The Orleans on Saturday morning. "Everybody is saying 2008 is going to be the Democrats' year. Are we going to let that happen? No!"

Nevada Democrats have carved out an ever-growing advantage over Republicans in statewide voter registration statistics in recent months. As of the end of February, Democrats had a registration edge of more than 40,000 voters over Republicans in a state that has traditionally been split down the middle.

But speakers at Saturday's convention pointed to the efforts of their counterparts across the aisle as evidence that all is far from lost for Republicans.

More than 10,000 people tried to attend the Clark County Democratic Convention on Feb. 23. But that event had to be stopped and the voting postponed when the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both believed they couldn't get a fair shake because so many people were turned away.

The divisions exposed there will hinder the Democrats, state Sen. Bob Beers, R-Las Vegas, told the GOP crowd.

"Democrats tend to run a little bit more on emotion than on intellect, and that means they have a very hard time forgiving the other side of a primary," he said, to cheers.

Once Clinton or Obama wins the nomination, half the Democratic electorate will be "too angry to show up in November," Beers predicted. "But that's not all it will take. It will also take all the Mitt Romney and Ron Paul delegates to support John McCain for president." A few stray boos could be heard in the crowd of the main ballroom.

Romney got 51 percent of the vote in the Jan. 19 Republican caucuses, with Paul in second and McCain in third at 13 percent.

Gov. Jim Gibbons, the day's keynote speaker, also emphasized unity, saying, "I'm very pleased now to tell you that I'm 100 percent in support of our Republican nominee, John McCain, for president in 2008."

In an interview, Gibbons acknowledged that in his precinct caucus on Jan. 19, McCain hadn't gotten his vote.

"No, I did not vote for him," Gibbons said. "But he is the most qualified individual that I can support based on his military background, his leadership ability, his understanding of the United States and most importantly, he's a Westerner."

Gibbons has a marked disagreement with McCain on the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, of which McCain was the strongest proponent out of all the major presidential candidates.

"I disagree with him 100 percent on supporting Yucca Mountain. I will never support Yucca Mountain," Gibbons said. "But there have been a number of other officials in the White House the last 20 years who have never stopped it or impeded it. It is up to Nevada to stop it, and we are doing it."

Gibbons said he knows McCain well and last saw him during the meeting last month of the National Governors Association in Washington, D.C. "We had a long, sit-down talk at that point in time talking about issues important to not just governors but individual states," Gibbons said.

Yucca was not among those issues, he said. "I didn't bring up Yucca Mountain to him nor have I heard anybody bringing it up to anybody else," he said.

Prompted by an aide, Gibbons said he certainly would discuss the matter with McCain eventually.

"The issue is getting John McCain elected and then working with him to stop Yucca Mountain," he said.

A public health crisis in Clark County, where numerous health clinics have been found to be using unsanitary methods, has been partly blamed on Gibbons' elimination of 10 health inspector positions from last year's budget.

Gibbons said he was "so very disappointed and so very ashamed" of critics "taking politics over the life and health and welfare of a lot of people that were harmed. This is not something that is caused by the recent budget crisis. That's just a bunch of hooey." He said investigators have found that inspections have been lacking for many years preceding his tenure.

Gibbons also recently has faced rumors about his personal life; he has publicly acknowledged that his marriage is in trouble. He declined to comment on those matters when asked, saying, "It's just a private matter. No decision has been made yet. ... We're still in the process."

Saturday's crowd was seated in three ballrooms, one holding the main stage and two others showing live video of the proceedings to the overflow.

The attendees represented about 60 percent of the precinct delegates elected in January, a remarkable proportion. Most years it is less than 10 percent.

Besides the speeches, the convention featured the earnest if tedious debate over bylaws and platform planks that is a staple of party conventions. In the end, the platform was passed and officers were elected to the county party executive committee.

Gibbons wasn't the only politician Saturday to admit that McCain was his Mr. Right Now, not his Mr. Right Then.

"We need to get behind our candidate," Rep. Dean Heller told the convention. "I'll be the first to say John McCain was not my first choice but he is my first choice today."

Heller challenged the crowd to prove that "conventional wisdom today in Washington, D.C., is wrong. Conventional wisdom in Washington, D.C., says we lose the presidency."

Heller got the biggest cheers of the day, a standing ovation, when he called for enforcing existing immigration law.

Sen. John Ensign noted that of 35 U.S. Senate seats up for election this year, 23 are Republican-held, the most ever for one party. Ensign, who chairs the National Republican Senatorial Committee, has the task of helping those senators keep their seats.

"The Democrats are fired up, they're ready to go, the odds are against us," Ensign said. "That's exactly where I like to be."

He decried Democrats as "a party that says the war is lost, that those sacrifices made by our men and women over there, we can't win that." He didn't refer by name to his delegation partner, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who drew controversy last year for using the word "lost."

Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., sent a video message but wasn't present at Saturday's convention. According to his staff, Porter spent the weekend at fundraisers in Florida.

Standing in for McCain was Mark Shurtleff, the attorney general of Utah. He noted that Utah also went overwhelmingly for Romney, but reminded them that Romney, in his speech leaving the race, called for the party to come together to defeat the Democrats in the interest of national security.

Shurtleff repeatedly ridiculed the opposition for their personal characteristics. "Barack or Hillary -- my apologies to the Baracks or Hillarys in the audience, but even their names sound liberal," he said.

Referring to a Clinton ad that asks who is best suited to rise to a late-night crisis, Shurtleff said, "When Hillary gets the call at 3 a.m., the call is, 'Do you know where your husband is?'" And he pointedly referred to "Obama's fathers -- one was African, one was Indonesian."

Clark County was allowed to send up to 1,970 delegates to next month's state convention in Reno. Historically, the county's delegation has never been filled because there were never enough people willing to pay their way to be state delegates.

A record number of state delegates volunteered, 895, according to Zadrowski. Since that is less than the number allowed, they were all made delegates without an election.

The next biggest Clark County Republican Convention, in 2004, drew about 500 participants.

State Republican Chairwoman Sue Lowden told the gathering she has invited McCain to the April 26 state convention. But she got big cheers when she said she had also invited Paul.

"I welcome you to join our Republican Party, to stay a part of this engaging conversation which is why we're here," she said to the Paul supporters.

--Contact reporter Molly Ball at mball @reviewjournal.com or (702) 387-2919.

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

Mohave Daily News
March 09, 2008

The Longest Walk fights for Indian rights, environmental protection

By Dominika Maslikowski
The Daily News

MOHAVE VALLEY - Although it's been 30 years since Dennis Banks launched The Longest Walk, many participants in this year's event say the fight for American Indian rights isn't over.

This year's walk began in San Francisco and will finish in July with a rally at the Capitol in Washington, D.C. When the walk is completed, Banks will use the information gathered from meeting tribes across the United States to write a manifesto he'll address to senators, congressmen and the Environmental Protection Agency. Focusing on the environment, Banks says he'll stress chromium waste, the proposed nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain, Nev., and how global warming affects harvest seasons.

For the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, it's about protecting the Colorado River and the other sacred sites that line the Mojave Desert.

Spirit Mountain and the mountain range near the Avi Casino are marked with litter, gang graffiti and shot-up abandoned cars. Collectors grab up artifacts or chip off rock pieces for souvenirs, officials say.

Topock Maze, believed to house the portal to the afterlife, is crossed by highways and gas pipelines. One tribal official says many think preserving a stretch of Route 66 is more important than the tribe's sacred land.

On Friday, participants in The Longest Walk met with the Fort Mojave tribe, toured their sacred sites and heard their grievances.

The walkers attended a presentation at the Aha Makav Cultural Society by Paul Jackson, who teaches arts and culture to tribal youth and high schoolers. Jackson showed the group slides of buffalo sculptures, landscapes and the paintings he has done depicting the tribe's creation story.

Officials also spoke on diminishing resources like cottonwood, willow and mesquite; droughts along the Colorado River and how uranium mining in Utah would impact the water flowing to the Tri-state. Chloride levels in the water, they said, also affect vegetation and feeding livestock.

“It's an effort throughout history,” said Linda Otero, the society's director. “We are a living culture and these things are part of our existence. This valley is our home.

“We need to stand forward and make our voices heard.”

SACRED SITES

At Topock Maze, just west of the California-Arizona border, the group hiked down a dirt path lined with purple flowers and pipelines marked with caution warnings. In the distance, across the Mojave Desert, stands a Pacific Gas & Electric Co. water treatment plant. In 2004, test wells and equipment to control hexavalent chromium pollution were installed without prior consultation with the tribe.

Nearby a marker tells the story of the Maze landmark - an ancient design of lines along the desert that guides a soul's journey to the afterlife for the Fort Mojave tribe.

After a brief stop overlooking a mountain range, criss-crossed by a highway and train track, the group made its way down toward the plant, stopping occasionally to get a closer look at a cactus flower or rub the leaves of a plant to smell its oils.

When they approached a facility for treating water, they snapped photos of a sign warning the water's unsafe for drinking, swimming or washing.

Henry Dominguez, a tribal elder holding a staff adorned with feathers, stepped forward for an impromptu speech.

“How did water - that's supposed to be pure life - get this way?” he asked. “Let it be known you are witnesses to the genocide that's being done to Mother Earth. How can future generations survive if they continue to do this?

“The youth is very important here. That's why we say listen to your elders because one day we'll be gone. ... And when they attack your sites and your burial places of your ancestors, then you'll feel the pain of indigenous people.”

Later in the afternoon the group made its way down to the banks of the Colorado River as officials told them about the surrounding monitoring wells and the proposals to build more. Some tribal members said they've had dreams of souls coming back, saying they needed help to get through to the afterlife, past the wells, bridges and roads that block their journey.

One tribal member walked across the desert sand toward the river and came back with a bottle of water from the Colorado. Tribal officials then presented the water, along with a piece of pottery and a bag of cedar, for the group to take on their journey to Washington, D.C.

“I will think about you guys,” Otero said, “as you're walking the distance.”

THE WALKERS

The group numbers more than 100 walkers and their supporters, as well as members of about 25 different tribes from across the U.S.

During their stay in Laughlin, some said the “four-star” treatment they received from the Avi Casino has been the exception. More often nights along the journey have been spent under the stars and mornings spent cooking breakfast aboard a converted school bus painted pastel blue.

About half the walkers are in their 20s or 30s. A fourth are American Indians from various tribes, another fourth are dread-locked or tie-dyed activists and the rest come from everywhere else, including as far off as Germany or Australia.

There is a large group of Japanese with three-month visas who flew in to the starting point, including a Buddhist woman with a shaved head and a Polish man who once wrote an article for a magazine about the sacred sites he saw for the first time on Friday.

Takuya Sasa, 28, flew in from Tokyo, where he works as a shoemaker. He came along on the trip because he wanted to see America by foot, and because he once had a great experience with American Indians in South Dakota. Every time he thinks of them, he says, it touches his heart and gives him the same sensation he gets at a Japanese temple.

“Just so many things to learn everyday -ways of the Native American cultures, their traditions,” he said, “and lessons from their culture, like taking care of elders. Japan had that custom but (is) losing it now.”

To make time for the five-month trip, some gave up their jobs or sold their homes.

Michael Robinson, 19, took a semester off from Northern Michigan University, where he's majoring in environmental and Native American studies.

A month into the trip, Robinson says he's learned flexibility and how to get along better with people of all types. The experience also taught him to take lessons from other cultures instead of believing in a culture where “your way was the only right way and all others had to be dominated.”

“I had some amazing experiences and met some great people. This first month has just been opening up and getting to know each other,” he said. “It's taught me to be flexible and go whichever way things take us.”

Robinson hopes to instill a care for nature into the next generation, and spread the message that humanity has reached the threshold of their resource consumption and population growth. The paradigms need to be changed, he said, so nature can be preserved.

Another motivation for many participants is meeting people, he said, and interacting with the communities along the way, listening to their stories, learning about their ways and touring their landmarks.

“(It's) seeing on their faces how important this walk is to them,” Robinson said, “and how they wish they could be going with us.”

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

Las Vegas SUN
March 08, 2008

Flashpoint: This is a momentous day …

This is a momentous day for the Clark County Republican Party. When the local GOP holds its county convention at The Orleans, it will hear a few speeches stuffed with red meat, come up with a platform its candidates can flee from and elect delegates to the state convention, some of whom will go to the national convention to complete the coronation of a man no one in the elected elite there today endorsed before he became inevitable. Indeed, John McCain ignored the state and finished third (!) on Jan. 19 behind Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. Yes, Ron Paul was favored by more caucusgoers here than the GOP nominee, who hates college sports betting and loves Yucca Mountain. Want to bet those subjects don’t come up today?

Pahrump Valley Times
March 08, 2008

Tom Buqo named to aid in water district

By Mark Waite
PVT

TONOPAH -- Nye County commissioners put all their money on long-time county hydrologist Tom Buqo Tuesday to set up a Nye County water district, giving him a $430,000 contract for a "turn key" operation to be completed by March 31, 2010.

The establishment of a Nye County Water District, approved in a bill by the Nevada Legislature last session, would serve as the focus for water management in Nye County, the scope of activities states.

The stated mission of the county water district is to develop long term plans to obtain water resources, mitigate any water environmental impacts, define ground water and surface water conditions and define alternatives for managing water resources.

Nye County Manager Ron Williams said the county will be allowed to divert a $2.5 million federal grant for a Nye County groundwater evaluation study for Buqo's contract. The county has $1.7 million left in that grant. The establishment of the water district will include completing that Pahrump groundwater study, in what Buqo called a key management tool for the water district.

Buqo advised commissioners if they went for option one, paying him $30,000 and going out for proposals for outside consultants to do the work, they would take a gamble they may end up with an inexperienced firm that could cost the county more money.

"After the course of a year or two, it will be like some other contracts where nothing has been accomplished other than to spend a lot of money, and we haven't accomplished our objective," Buqo said.

Commissioner Peter Liakopoulos suggested if the county was spending this amount of money, Buqo should be a paid county staff member. Buqo said the county would eventually have a water district manager, though Commissioner Joni Eastley questioned if the federal grant could be used for paid staff.

"One of the key elements in the first few years as county staff or contractor is to line up sources of funding with the intent of making the district totally self-sufficient, if it's not in three years, within five years," Buqo said.

Once the current federal funding expires, there was concern among commissioners about how to continue paying for the district.

Commissioner Gary Hollis felt congressional earmarks will be phased out in the near future. Buqo said any financial burden on citizens of Nye County won't be popular, but predicted if the county can achieve "critical mass" with federal funding over the next five years the funds will continue.

Buqo admitted he couldn't say with 100 percent certainty the water district would be up and running in two years.

Commissioner Butch Borasky said "I'll probably get crucified for this" in making the motion to approve option number two, the $430,000 contract.

Buqo's estimates to establish the water district alone amounts to $234,000. It includes $30,000 to train Nye County Water District board members, another $32,000 to train Nye County Water District staff, $43,000 to develop the requirements for capital, $20,000 to identify funding sources and $26,000 in public outreach.

The groundwater evaluation study adds up to another $196,000. It includes $103,000 to develop a calibrated flow model of Pahrump Valley. Four other tasks would cost $22,000 to $25,000 apiece: developing future pumping scenarios, transient simulations, compiling document results and coordinating with the state Division of Water Resources.

During a January 2007 special meeting, county commissioners overcame concerns about creating a big bureaucracy in deciding to submit a bill draft request to the Nevada Legislature authorizing the creation of the water district.

At that meeting, Buqo outlined the advantages to having a water district.

Some projects Buqo would like to consider include a damage assessment on federal contamination of the Nevada Test Site, where Buqo feels there are enough water rights to supply the entire state of Nevada.

The water district could prevent a water grab by the Southern Nevada Water Authority, Buqo said. But ultimately he said the water district could enter into an agreement with a water purveyor, like the Southern Nevada Water Authority or Vidler Water Co., to pipe water from Central Nevada to Pahrump, perhaps in another 20 years down the road.

Commissioners meticulously outlined the composition of the water board to include representatives from throughout Nye County. Eastley expressed concerns about ending up with an Owens Valley type situation, where Los Angeles power companies drained water from Owens Valley in Eastern California.

Buqo is already under a $200,000 contract this year with the Nye County Nuclear Waste Repository Project Office for long-term aquifer testing in Amargosa Valley and evaluating impacts of Yucca Mountain. He charges a rate of $140 per hour as principal investigator.

Buqo was awarded a $95,000 contract amendment last year to do hydro-geologic evaluations in the Beatty area and near the proposed Yucca Mountain railroad facilities.

Buqo received an amendment last November boosting his contract from $47,251 to $272,281 to work on the Pahrump groundwater evaluation study.

During a presentation at the annual Devil's Hole workshop last May, Buqo said over 80 percent of the wells in Pahrump were drilled to a depth of less than 150 feet. He predicted they could go dry by 2030 based on current rates of water withdrawal averaging one foot per year.

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

Spartanburg Herald Journal
March 07, 2008

Editorial: Energy choices

Environmental objection to nuclear plant avoids necessary decisions

An environmental group's objection to a new nuclear power plant in Cherokee County ignores the fact that this state and nation must make difficult choices about providing energy and preserving the environment.

South Carolina Friends of the Earth has asked state regulators to prohibit Duke Energy Corp. from raising money through power bills to plan for the new plant. The group claims nuclear power is dangerous, costly and produces waste for which there is no safe means of disposal.

Those objections are superficial and ignore the costs of alternative means of energy production.

The nuclear power industry in the United States has a long record of safety, and the capability to operate nuclear reactors safely has increased with the advance of technology.

It is true that there is no safe method to dispose of high-level nuclear waste such as spent fuel rods, but that is because environmental groups have opposed the creation of these methods.

The United States is building a suitable and safe method in the nuclear waste facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Environmental groups oppose the opening of the site and sue over unreasonable demands. One suit claimed that a 10,000-year guarantee against leaks at the facility isn't long enough.

Nuclear power can be expensive, but so are the alternatives, especially when we consider environmental factors.

Nuclear power is one of the few methods of generating electricity that doesn't pour greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, adding to the problem of global warming.

South Carolina and the nation have difficult choices to make regarding energy and the environment. We have to generate electricity somehow.

It isn't enough to simply say no to nuclear plants because we don't want to create waste dumps, to say no to oil- and gas-fired plants because they fuel global warming, to say no to coal plants because they create acid rain and increase climate change, to say no to hydro-electric plants because dams ruin river ecosystems.

Environmental groups that object to one should declare the alternative they favor. We can't afford to limit ourselves to pie-in-the-sky renewable energy alternatives. In the real world, neither solar, wind nor tide power is going to supply this region's homes, businesses and industries with energy in the near future.

Nuclear power represents the best compromise between our energy and environmental needs.

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