Flaws in data could delay Yucca

Thursday, Aug. 23, 2001 | 11:10 a.m.

NRC scientists could not find basic information in DOE's reports concerning radiation exposure, volcanic events and how fast water flows through Yucca Mountain.

Estimates for radiation and its effect on humans and the environment at Yucca Mountain were not consistent.

Because minerals in ground water could corrode buried waste containers, more study is needed.

Problems with scientific findings may cause regulators to miss an Oct. 1 deadline, which may delay Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's recommendation of Yucca Mountain as the nation's nuclear waste repository.

If findings gathered at the mountain over 20 years cannot be verified, the Energy Department may not be able to request a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2002.

NRC staff earlier this year discovered numerous flaws in the DOE's scientific information.

William Reamer of the NRC on Wednesday said the DOE was preparing a schedule to respond to chronic problems of its scientific data, a process called "quality assurance."

Reamer and other NRC staff have said the DOE has done a poor job preparing evidence that would pave the way for the commission to conduct up to four years of formal hearings to allow the construction of Yucca Mountain.

How long the Yucca project may be delayed is unclear until after the DOE responds to the NRC's concerns, Reamer said.

Bill Belke, NRC field representative in Las Vegas, said that the DOE has "significant deficiencies" with the Yucca Mountain program. It is Belke's job to visit Yucca Mountain and oversee the DOE's work there.

If the flaws aren't corrected the NRC could not consider a license for Yucca Mountain, he said.

"We have to have confidence in DOE documents before we can even consider a license," Belke said.

Abraham is expected to recommend the site to President Bush by December if the NRC completes its review by Oct. 1.

Bechtel SAIC Co., the primary contractor at Yucca Mountain, stopped developing software for the project in June because experts could not verify the accuracy of a computer program designed to verify the DOE's information.

Bechtel experts could not determine whether staff were qualified to work on the computer program, said Bechtel's Nancy Williams, who is in charge of the company's work at the project.

The latest snag in the project came a month after NRC staff members discovered missing scientific information, including calculation errors, varying radiation exposures and possible chemical reactions involving the buried nuclear waste and the containers that could result in radiation leaks.

If Bush considers the project safe, he could forward his decision to Congress. But if Nevada vetoed the project as expected, Congress would have to override the state's objection to approve the repository site. The NRC would then consider licensing the repository.

The DOE's schedule puts the Yucca Mountain recommendation in NRC's hands by late 2002. A permit would allow construction to begin about 2007, with the repository opening in 2010 at the earliest.