Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

sponsored by
News


CORRECTION -- 01/18/08 -- A headline written for a story about the Department of Energy's decision to no longer hold transport route hearings for the Yucca Mountain project implied that there were fiscal reasons for ending those meetings. The DOE said it had met all requirements for holding formal hearings.

Budget cuts Yucca transport hearings

Deadline past for formal comments on route

Although there've been plenty of hearings in Nevada on plans to build a repository at Yucca Mountain for disposing highly radioactive waste and the Department of Energy's vision for hauling it there on rail lines and roads, the odds of more formal hearings for people along transportation routes outside the state are slim to none.

That was the word Wednesday from Gary Lanthrum, DOE's director of logistics management for the Yucca Mountain Project, who discussed the issue after his presentation on transportation topics to an independent panel of scientists reviewing the project's work.


Most Popular Stories
  • NORM: Terry Fator, wife ending marriage
  • Planet Hollywood fined for Prive nightclub's actions
  • NORM: Blaze breaks out during magic act
  • NORM: Jackson worked on album at Palms
  • Ex-Ensign aide details wife's affair
  • SENATOR'S AFFAIR: Hamptons given $96,000 in gifts
  • LV area residential real estate sales reach record in June
  • Ensign wrote lover a letter, saying their affair was a 'sin'
  • Official: Fatal gunshot in back
  • Coroner says sexual assault suspect killed by police was shot in back




  • While there'll still be a chance to comment online as aspects of the transportation plan evolve and routes are designated a decade or more down the road, the hearing process and opportunity for submitting formal comments ended last week at the conclusion of the comment period for supplemental impact statements on the repository and plans for building a 319-mile railroad in east-central Nevada.

    The national transportation plan, as described in a previous impact statement, will be open for comment "forever," Lanthrum said, "as work is accomplished."

    "When routes are selected, that will get folded in," he said after his presentation in Las Vegas to the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.

    "No additional hearings will be held," he said.

    Part of the reason is that DOE has met all the requirements for holding formal hearings, even if none on the issue were held in numerous major metropolitan areas where trains and trucks hauling heavy casks of spent nuclear fuel could pass through on their way to the mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

    Those hearings, 21 in all, were held in 1999 and 2000 to air the draft environmental impact statement for the planned repository. Nine were held in Nevada and 12 were held elsewhere in the nation, including large communities such as Washington, D.C., and Chicago, and smaller cities such as Boise, Idaho and Lone Pine, Calif.

    Another reason for not holding any more formal hearings is because the danger of transporting nuclear waste is not greater, in fact less, in terms of accidents, than with trains and trucks hauling such hazardous materials as chlorine and propane, Lanthrum said. And hearings are not conducted, he said, when those materials are to be shipped through cities that are on the potential route for nuclear waste transportation.

    Exceptions could occur, he said, when actual routes are designated. But until those routes are known there's no reason to put more hearings on DOE's agenda.

    "When we select actual routes, if impacts are significantly different from what we analyzed, then we'll go back and do additional hearings," he said.

    If that occurs, it won't happen for years. The nation's nuclear waste chief, Ward Sproat, told the board and a state legislative committee this week that the transportation program has been "taken off the critical path" in order to use that funding to keep the overall project afloat in the face of budget cuts.

    Even with money diverted from the transportation effort to complete the repository's license application this year, Sproat said 500 employees will be laid off in waves.

    The program staffs some 2,400 full-time positions, but funding cutbacks by Congress of $108 million from the 2008 budget this late in the fiscal year have left him no choice but to pursue layoffs.

    The Bush administration requested $494.5 million for the fiscal year that began on Oct. 1. Congress in December approved $386.5 million.

    In the budget request, $104.3 million was supposed to be used to meet transportation milestones. Now, only $15 million is available for transportation after the budget cuts. The focus of using that money, Lanthrum said, "will be getting the EIS (environmental impact statement) done. That's my No. 1 priority," he said.

    With the Energy Department scrambling from the effects of budget cuts, Nevada picked up its pace in opposing the multi-billion-dollar project. The Las Vegas City Council voted 6-0 on Wednesday to join the state in its legal battles against the Yucca Mountain Project.

    The city and Nevada agreed to be jointly represented by the same counsel, Egan, Fitzpatrick and Malsch in common legal challenges regarding attempts by DOE to obtain a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build and operate a repository at Yucca Mountain.

    Review-Journal writer Alan Choate contributed to this report. Contact reporter Keith Rogers at krogers@ reviewjournal.com or (702) 383-0308.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 4 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Vegas Informer wrote on January 17, 2008 01:43 PM: BARACK OBAMA LIED TO NEVADA!

    COPY AND PASTE THIS LINK INTO YOUR BROWSER:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2P0sGcy1LE


    BC wrote on January 17, 2008 11:20 AM: post!


    BC wrote on January 17, 2008 11:17 AM: Actually, they do. As there have been shipments of nuclear waste via rail and road for over 40 years between Idaho and shipyards on the east and west coasts, incident free, there is quite a bit of basis.

    I'm not saying I want it here in NV, but the truth is the truth, regardless of the degree of emotion saying otherwise.


    Roger wrote on January 17, 2008 09:19 AM: Those DOE idiots have no basis for saying that transporting nuclear waste is safer than other hazardous materials. If you read their EIS, they have no evacuation plan for any of the communities in the event of an accident.

    Having fewer hearings is yet another attempt to rubberstamp something that nobody wants. More stupidity on their part means another nail in the Yucca coffin...