Yucca layoffs possible

Wednesday, Aug. 18, 1999 | 11:12 a.m.

If Congress cuts the Energy Department's budget too much, the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository project faces major layoffs and delays, an official said Tuesday.

President Clinton proposed $409 million to continue scientific studies at the mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, but the House slashed that to $280 million.

The Senate has offered $355 million. Lake Barrett, Nuclear Waste Management acting chief, said Tuesday that he expects a research budget somewhere between the two figures.

"The bigger the cut, the bigger the delay," Barrett said during a meeting with local government officials at the Yucca Mountain Project Science Center in Las Vegas.

Barrett's comments came at the DOE's first meeting with local and state officials since a 1,400-page draft environmental impact statement was released Aug. 6.

The House has removed $15 million for state and local oversight of the project, Barrett said. The Republican-led House has slashed oversight funds for the state and 10 counties to oversee Yucca Mountain since 1995.

The House loaded its $20.2 billion energy and water appropriations bill with water projects, Barrett said, and they come first. That hurts Yucca Mountain research funds.

"It will be devastating to the DOE, and I can't read the goat entrails on what the number will be," he said.

Barrett could not estimate how many layoffs might occur.

Yucca Mountain Project spokesman Allen Benson said about 1,600 people work on the project. "I don't have a clue on how many layoffs could occur until Congress decides," he said.

While not blaming the House for intentionally trying to disrupt Yucca Mountain research which is expected to be complete by 2001, Barrett said deadlines may slip.

"Things in Washington between the president and Congress are more chaotic than usual," Barrett said, adding that he would not be surprised to see continuing spending bills to cover federal activities after Oct. 1. The government could even shut down until the budget fights are resolved, as it has in the past.

The DOE released a draft environmental impact statement that helps government scientists focus the direction and scope of research at the mountain, Barrett said. Rather than completing a final impact statement after six months of public comment, the DOE may release both it and a technical assessment in November 2000.

But if Congress slashes the DOE budget by $100 million, work would be delayed on the license application to be considered by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2001. At the earliest, it would be ready by late 2002.

The budget situation has to change before the DOE could consider building a repository scheduled to open in 2010 with railroads and access roads, Barrett said.

While utilities contribute $630 million a year to a fund to help pay for Yucca Mountain, the Defense Department and its contractors have failed to pay $1 billion.

Lawsuits filed by nuclear utilities may drain Yucca Mountain funding further, Barrett said. The utilities are suing because when the fund was established, the government agreed to remove spent nuclear fuel from plant sites by 1998.

The earliest that will happen now, if Yucca Mountain is approved and a repository built, is 2010. An appeals court decision is not expected until next year.

At the meeting, state and local government officials raised questions on everything from possible routes to the proposed repository to receiving the latest information about ongoing studies.

Geologist Steve Frishman, Nevada's Nuclear Projects Agency technical policy coordinator, said that the DOE could finish its studies and turn them over to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which must license any repository, without updating the state in time to respond.

"The state, the public and the NRC should review the Energy Department's final report," Frishman said.

The DOE's schedule is driving the project, Frishman said.

Barrett and project coordinator Tim Sullivan assured Frishman that the DOE will provide copies to all the information to the state.

Dennis Bechtel, Clark County's nuclear waste director, said the draft impact statement ignored local concerns about effects on the tourism economy and proposed using the locally funded beltway for hauling 77,000 tons of nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain.

The Transportation Department prefers the routes in the statement, DOE manager Wendy Dixon said. The statement's developer said the state could offer alternatives as long as they meet DOT guidelines.

Dixon explained that the statement does not conclude anything because so much scientific work remains to be done before the DOE can submit a report to the president about 2001. It examines environmental effects at the site, not economic effects.