Bomb test at NTS remains explosive

Launce Rake

Wednesday, Jan. 3, 2007 | 7:13 a.m.

With a public meeting set for Tuesday on the planned detonation of 700 tons of explosive at Nevada Test Site, opponents, state officials and even their federal counterparts say the battle over Divine Strake is not over.

But federal agencies are moving forward swiftly � too swiftly for some � with plans for the Test Site blast. Those plans have triggered opposition or concern from environmental groups and state government, including former Gov. Kenny Guinn.

On Dec. 22 the National Nuclear Security Administration, which manages the Test Site, released an assessment that suggests environmental effects would be minimal from the detonation of the fuel-oil/ ammonium nitrate explosive.

Also on Dec. 22 the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, which would conduct the test blast, announced it would hold three meetings, including one in Las Vegas, to provide information.

The timing of the twin announcements from the federal agencies planning the test sparked protests from local environmentalists and members of Congress who have been concerned about both the environmental impact and the potential application of information from the blast.

The test is part of the military's effort to design "bunker busting" explosives that can knock out hardened, underground structures such as those suspected in North Korean and Iranian nuclear operations. Critics of the U.S. nuclear weapons program have noted that Divine Strake was part of a nuclear-weapons development program now banned by Congress. They argue that Divine Strake, which would be a bigger blast than anything in the U.S. conventional bomb arsenal, is still a nuclear-weapons program.

The military has said the information generated by the test is not designed to further any specific bomb on the drawing boards and could be used for the development of either a conventional or nuclear bunkerbuster.

In Nevada, the concern has focused more on the environmental impact. On Nov. 28 Guinn sent a letter to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman asking for a comprehensive environmental impact statement.

Such a process could take years to complete.

Test Site managers argue that an abbreviated environmental assessment is sufficient because the Energy Department conducted a full environmental impact study in 1996 for ongoing operations at the Test Site.

Guinn noted that the Defense Department had abandoned consideration of an alternative site at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico because it would require a lengthy environmental impact study.

Guinn complained that an environmental assessment wouldn't adequately evaluate the potential effects of the blast and would give short shrift to public involvement.

The concerns have been echoed by newly installed Gov. Jim Gibbons, like Guinn a Republican, and by Peggy Maze Johnson, executive director of Citizen Alert. Gibbons' spokesman Brent Boynton said Gibbons supports the testing "but only so long as these environmental questions are satisfied."

Nevada environmental protection officials are reviewing information submitted Dec. 21 on the presence of radioactive materials in the soil at the Test Site. The division is responsible for granting an air-quality permit for the test.

Allen Biaggi, director of the Nevada Conservation and Natural Resources Department, said he, like Guinn and Gibbons, backs a full assessment process � but the state doesn't have the power to require such a study.

Johnson said the environmental assessment "isn't worth the paper it's printed on." She pointed out that a lawsuit filed in April to stop the blast by a coalition of American Indians and groups representing "downwinders" from previous nuclear testing is still in the courts and will have to be resolved. She also charged that the timing of the federal environmental assessment release � the second, so far, for Divine Strake � and the scheduling of public meetings was designed to limit media coverage.

A year ago, the Defense Department quietly announced the blast would be scheduled for June. It wasn't until Defense Threat Reduction Agency Director James Tegnelia said � four months later � that the test would send "a mushroom cloud over Las Vegas" that loud public criticism surfaced.

"Every single time they make an announcement, they do it at a time when people are not focusing on it because it is a holiday," Johnson said. She added that Tuesday's public meeting and the Jan. 24 cutoff for written comments to be included in the public record don't give enough time for the public to respond.

Kevin Rohrer, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration and the Test Site, said the release of the environmental assessment before the Christmas break was coincidental.

"The sequence of timing was unfortunate, but that's how long it took to prepare and that's when it was released," he said. "We recognized the timing, and we tried to get it out as far in advance of the holidays as we could."

He said that if the agency had held back the environmental assessment release until after the holidays, the agency would have been criticized for delaying the release. "We recognized that whatever we did there would be criticized, and we made the decision to release it rather than holding it back and releasing it later."

Rohrer said the Energy Department has not made a formal decision on whether to go forward with a full environmental impact study. The department still could issue "finding of no significant impact," which would allow the test to go forward, or decide to do the more comprehensive analysis after studying public comments.

He said the federal government has fulfilled its state-level requirements, however.

"We have submitted information and data to the state of Nevada that demonstrates this experiment can be conducted in compliance with our existing air permit."

Launce Rake can be reached at 259-4127 or at lrake@lasvegassun. com.