Tuesday, April 6, 2004 | 11:24 a.m.
WASHINGTON -- Nuclear waste will be shipped to Nevada mainly via train, the Energy Department announced Monday, if its proposed nuclear waste storage site gets approved.
The department selected the option of using trains to ship waste to Nevada from 127 sites around the country to Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The department also decided to move ahead with the proposed 319-mile Caliente corridor rail route in Nevada, spokesman Allen Benson said. A Federal Register notice announcing the decision could come later this week.
Since February 2002, the department has said it preferred the mostly rail mode of shipping waste, and in December it named the Caliente corridor -- a route that goes through Caliente and to the Yucca Mountain site -- as its preferred route. A route through Carlin is the backup plan. Formally announcing it will use the rail plan allows the department to move forward with environmental planning, Benson said.
The department has public hearings planned for early May in Amargosa Valley, Goldfield and Caliente. Out of these meetings, a draft analysis will be issued sometime next year, Benson said.
The Nevada congressional delegation criticized the announcement. Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said it was "outrageous" for the department to issue a decision when the state's six legal challenges against the project have yet to be decided. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said there is no way the department can safely move the waste no matter how it plans to do it.
"With this latest announcement, DOE (the Energy Department) solidifies the impression it is grasping at straws in its haste to ram the project through," Reid said.
Monday's announcement did not include a decision on whether the department will use dedicated trains, or a train that only moves spent nuclear fuel. Benson said that will be decided as the environmental analysis gets done.
Based on the rail choice, waste will come via 3,300 rail shipments over 24 years, Benson said. Waste will come from 127 sites around the country to Nevada. Because not all waste storage sites are near tracks, another 1,079 shipments would still be sent by truck to Nevada. Benson said a supplemental plan to move waste in Nevada to the site via truck still exists.
"If you don't have rail, we have to have the ability to move the material," Benson said, adding that the department wants to minimize the amount of road shipments by using rail.
Robert Halstead, the state's transportation consultant said that at least 24 of the waste storage sites cannot ship by rail so other plans will have to be made to deal with their load.
"None of DOE's problems are solved," Halstead said. "Mostly rail could mean more shipments, more political controversy."
He cautioned that the shipment estimates the department gives out are the "optimal target" and can increase.
Bob Loux, director of the state's Agency for Nuclear Projects, predicted that the department will end up using the truck plan anyway since building a rail line will cost too much money, take too long to build and have too many logistical problems.
"Rail is the safer choice but it has a lot of uncertainties associated with it," Loux said.
The state will examine the Federal Register notice, expected to be published Thursday, to see exactly what the department proposes and if there is a possibility of legal action.
The delegation and other critics of the site point to potential terrorist threats and accidents as the main problems of moving waste to the state, among others.
"If the DOE (Energy Department) thinks that the Nevada delegation's commitment to halting the Yucca Mountain project will somehow lessen because they have bypassed more heavily populated areas in favor of Caliente, the department is completely mistaken," Ensign said.
Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said there is no good choice because the waste should not come to the state.
"The only positive is that now that the decision had been made we can focus on the follies of the rail," she said.
She said the department has still not explained what routes the waste will travel, what type of canisters it will use and how it will protect the shipments from terrorist attacks or who would be responsible to clean up the aftermath of any accident. Berkley still has a pending bill that calls for transportation security studies.
She pointed to the Baltimore tunnel fire in 2001 that, had there been nuclear waste on a train, it could have damaged a shipping cask.
"It could have contaminated major metropolitan areas on the East Coast," Berkley said.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry maintain that a transportation cask would not have released radioactive material inside the tunnel at the time of the fire.
Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., called the selection "premature and unnecessary."
"The DOE (Energy Department) is putting the proverbial nuclear waste cart before the horse, all to the detriment of Nevada's rural communities, mining companies, and property owners," Gibbons said.
He opposes the department's proposal to withdraw 300,000 acres of land to study the proposed route.
"Withdrawing that much land will cause many Nevada businesses and land owners, primarily ranchers and miners, tremendous economic loss," Gibbons said. "Yet, it continues to move forward with this reckless plan despite the state and communities' strong opposition."
Steve Kraft, director of waste management for the Nuclear Energy Institute, a nuclear power industry group, said it is hard to comment on the decision because the exact details will not be known until the Federal Register notice gets published.
"We don't know what the full story is yet," Kraft said. "You have to read the whole thing to understand what they are doing."
Kraft emphasized though this has always been a "mostly rail" option so it should come as no surprise that a percentage of the shipments will be made by truck.
Lincoln County Commissioner Tim Perkins said he supported the decision to ship the nuclear waste by rail through Lincoln County.
"I think it was a good decision. Rail is the safest way to transport it," Perkins said.
Perkins said the railroad might bring jobs to the county.
"They're going to have inspection stations, and maybe they can hire locals to work there," Perkins said.
Perkins said county officials will have to be sure to address concerns of ranchers and make sure a new rail line won't be a problem for grazing animals.
"Those are issues we will have to deal with, and if worked right I'm sure it can be a benefit to them," he said.
Lincoln County Commissioner Hal Keaton opposes the Yucca Mountain project and the proposal to ship nuclear waste through his county.
"I'm probably the only elected official in Lincoln County opposed to bringing nuclear waste through here," Keaton said. "Most people in this county seem to be pretty complacent about it."
Keaton said he has pressed supporters of the project on the issue of whether the county would see any economic boost from nuclear waste coming through Lincoln County.
While there might be some jobs for locals to help build a new rail line, Keaton said, once the railroad is built he doesn't think there will be any economic benefit to having nuclear waste travel through the county.
Suzanne Struglinski can be reached at (202)662-7245 or [email protected]
archive
