Comments (32) | Add a comment
Licensing efforts continue
Tools
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
Updated: Apr. 10, 2012 | 10:16 a.m.
Department of Energy lawyers are forging ahead with their defense of a license application to build the nation's nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain.
They met a deadline last week for filing briefs on questions that Nevada's attorneys raised with a nuclear regulatory panel, which is tracking safety concerns about plans for turning the mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, into a burial site for 77,000 tons of highly radioactive waste.
The briefs were filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board despite the Obama administration's stance that Yucca Mountain is no longer an option for a repository. An internal DOE memo that surfaced last month also stated, "All license defense activities will be terminated in December 2009."
Nevada's top legal consultant, Marty Malsch, had hoped lawyers for the DOE would default by missing the deadline but was not surprised that didn't happen.
"As things now stand, they are pursuing the license application by defending their position in the briefs they filed," he said Tuesday.
On Wednesday, Yucca Mountain Project spokesman Allen Benson confirmed that the Energy Department would use $197 million Congress appropriated this year for the pursuit of a license.
"Our mission is to support the licensing process, and that's what we're doing," Benson said.
Nevada also met the deadline by submitting a single brief that covered about 10 legal questions. Some of the state's arguments would obstruct the DOE's nuclear repository plans should the judges' panel rule in Nevada's favor.
"We argued that it is unlawful to postpone installment of the drip shields until 100 years," Malsch said.
He was referring to DOE's plan to cover metal waste containers with titanium shields to prevent corrosion and damage to the containers a century after they are stored.
"If we win on that, then they have to revise a major part of their license application," Malsch said.
He said the Department of Energy also is required to evaluate how radioactive releases would increase if there are no drip shields. It did not do so.
"If we win on that, we believe we would show the repository doesn't meet the standard" for radiation safety set by the Environmental Protection Agency, Malsch said.
Bruce Breslow, executive director of Nevada's Agency for Nuclear Projects and the state's lead Yucca Mountain opponent, said another concern is that DOE failed to submit a detailed, final design for the repository as required by nuclear waste laws. Submitting an inadequate, preliminary design "would be like designing a nuclear reactor without the reactor in it," he said.
That is one of what now stands at 225 contentions filed by the state and approved by federal nuclear regulators from the Construction Authority Board.
The nuclear industry's lobbying arm, the Nuclear Energy Institute, has called for developing a new strategy for radioactive waste disposal. The spent fuel is stored at reactor sites across the country in pools and in dry casks above ground, a method that scientists expect will work for a century.
The parties have 30 days to file responses with the court. A hearing for oral arguments in the case is scheduled in Las Vegas in late January.
Contact reporter Keith Rogers at krogers@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0308.
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal 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 use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
But Colin, the federal legislative branch called Congress HAS decided that Yucca Mountain is the repository in 1987.
Further you ask why place it 100 miles from a city based on gambling and tourism. Because it is next to where 1000 atomic weapons were detonated in a closed basin where the water supply to no one is contaminated for millions of years. And almost no where else in the country does such conditions exist. If the creation of mushroom clouds didn't deter visitors, why do you think solid waste in secure casks would?
You basically are saying NIMBY. No other reason. However, if Nevada doesn't want to take care of its portion of nuclear waste, then it should stop using nuclear electricity and defend itself from foreign countires. Sounds like you want all of the benefits from nuclear power and push the disposal of its waste off on the other 49 states.
Colin,
Nevada has lots and lots of nuclear waste that it is responsible for, including defense wastes, Navy wastes and nuclear powered electricity. All of these have made Nevada and Las Vegas what it is today.
Sounds like you recommend each state take its own waste. OK, so where do you want Nevada to put its waste?
@ColinFromLasVegas-
Your reaction is based on simplistic fear, your points are without facts, and your entire argument completely specious.
If you wanted to cling to every moment of life, why on Earth did you move to one of the least healthy states in the U.S.?
Have a glass of the wonderful Las Vegas water, calm yourself, study the facts, and try to find a legitimate reason not to locate this facility a hundred miles from nowhere in a state with nothing to lose.