The Vultures on
Yucca Mountain
(Facts that you should know, before you start to glow.)
Sightings from The Catbird Seat
~ o ~
April 4, 2005
YUCCA MOUNTAIN
Workers describe sabotage
Whistle-blower case lists efforts bypass water meter,
violate EPA guidelines
By Keith Rogers, Review-Journal
Pipe fitters on the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project were told by a foreman two years ago to sabotage the tunnel’s main water line and make a special pipe to bypass a meter that measures how much of the state’s water is used.
That’s according to a claim made in a Labor Department whistle-blower case and in interviews last month with former contract workers at the site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Before Ronald Dollens of Pahrump was fired in May 2003 by Yucca Mountain Project contractor Bechtel SAIC, he said he endured “a lot of harassment” for reporting what he perceived as violations of worker safety laws and Environmental Protection Agency laws, including the Clear Air Act and Clean Water Act....
“There was sabotage that wen on. A pipe that went into the portal was purposely broke for overtime,” Dollens said.
In a separate incident, he said, pipe fitters made a special pipe section so that groundwater, pumped from a well near Yucca Mountain, could be installed temporarily to bypass the place where the state’s water is measured....
In a statement that Dollens filed for a Labor Department investigation into his wrongful termination claim, he said his foreman, Mike Oettinger, asked him and co-worker Dale Cain in November 2002 “to purposely break a line that ran into the tunnel just so we could get overtime pay fixing the pipe that would be broken.”...
A spokesman for Bechtel SAIC, Jason Bohne, also wouldn’t comment on the allegations, citing ongoing litigation....
Last year on April 1, Christopher Lee, deputy regional administrator for the Labor Department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration in San Francisco, recommended Dollens receive a $250,000 punitive award from Bechtel SAIC for “reckless conduct indifferent to the rights of the whistle-blower.” ...
Bechtel SAIC’s attorneys objected to the suggested punitive award, and the case is now before Administrative Law Judge William Dorsey....
April 6, 2005
E-mails Fuel State Outrage
Lawmakers demand Yucca probe
By Steve Tetreault, Las Vegas Review Journal
WASHINGTON - Nevada leaders on Tuesday supported a call for an independent investigation of Yucca Mountain to address problems that Gov. Kenny Guinn charged have reached Enron proportions.
Guinn compared fraud allegations at the proposed nuclear waste site to corporate wrongdoers at the Houston energy trader, and also at the WorldCom telecommunications firm, who have been charged “for cooking the books and fabricating information.”
“I see no difference between those scandals and what appears to have occurred in DOE’s Yucca Mountain program,” Guinn told a House subcommittee that reviewed the allegations.
During a three-hour hearing, Nevada elected officials sought to increase pressure on government agencies following the discovery of e-mails in which scientists talked about making up data and taking shortcuts in documenting water and climate conditions at the Yucca site.
The disclosures last month prompted a criminal investigation by inspectors at the Energy and Interior departments, and fresh efforts by Nevada leaders and repository critics to kill the program....
“I have no confidence in the DOE to get to the bottom of this fraud,” said Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev.
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Yucca Mountain “is a lesson in what’s bad with the federal government.”
The hearing was arranged by Rep. John Porter, R-Nev, Reps. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., and Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., joined him in aiming sharp questions at officials from the Energy Department and the U.S. Geological Survey....
Ted Garrish, Yucca Mountain acting director, urged the lawmakers not to rush to judgment. In written testimony, he said an employee appeared to have backdated entries into a scientific notebook to meet quality assurance requirements.”...
John Mitchell, president of Bechtel-SAIC Co., LLC, the Yucca program’s management firm, said the e-mails were discovered in December.
Mitchell said the messages were discussed initially with Bechtel lawyers but he was not informed until March 9. “We immediately notified the Department of Energy,” he said....
April 6, 2005
State may look into claim about
plan to steal water
By Keith Rogers, Review-Journal
Nevada’s top water official said Tuesday he’s considering how to react to former Yucca Mountain workers’ claims that their foreman discussed a way to steal groundwater at the nuclear waste site.
“I’m not sure what I’m going to do,” State Engineer Hugh Ricci said regarding claims in a Labor Department whistle-blower case.
“Most likely I will,” send an inspector to look into the allegations, Ricci said. “I’d like to check with our attorney.”
Ronald Dollens of Pahrump, a former employee for Yucca Mountain Project contractor Bechtel SAIC, has said foreman Mike Oettinger instructed him to make a special piece of pipe to be used to temporarily bypass the state’s water meter at a pump house near Yucca Mountain. It was designed to be inserted into the line and easily removed....
Dollens was fired in May 2003.
In November 2003, Ricci denied the Department of Energy permanent rights to 140 million gallons per year of groundwater to build and operate a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain.
Dollen’s wrongful termination case is before an administrative law judge after Bechtel SAIC challenged a Labor Department investigator’s recommendation that Dollens be paid $250,000 for retaliating after he raised complaints....
< < < FLASHBACK < < <
Whatever happened to States’ Rights?...
January 5, 2002
NEVADA’S ELECTED OFFICIALS OPPOSE NUCLEAR WASTE SITE
Associated Press
LAS VEGAS (AP) - Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham emerged yesterday from a tunnel at a proposed national nuclear waste dump and said he is ready to make a decision on whether radioactive waste can be stored there safely....
He didn’t say when he will make a decision.
The visit to the vast federal reservation drew protests from Nevada’s elected officials, who strongly oppose an Energy Department proposal to bury 77,000 tons of radioactive waste at Yucca Mountain, about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Abraham became the third energy secretary to tour the mountain since the tunnel was completed in April 1997. Since then the Energy Department has been conducting scientific studies of how heat, water and geology would affect storage of nuclear material.
Nevada Sen. Harry Reid appeared with Gov. Kenny Guinn and other elected officials on the steps of the federal courthouse in Las Vegas to underscore their opposition to the Yucca Mountain project.
Nuclear waste is currently stored in casks at 103 commercial reactors and various industrial and military sites around the nation....
Nevada already has filed three federal lawsuits trying to block the project.
February 16, 2002
Bush Approves Nuclear
Waste Site
Government plans to bury 77,000 tons
in Nevada desert
By Eric Pianin, The Washington Post
WASHINGTON - President Bush yesterday authorized construction of a huge, centralized site for nuclear waste storage 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, saying that the long-debated project was essential to the future of nuclear power and national security.
Despite the strong objections of Nevada officials, Bush affirmed Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham’s recent finding that the proposed project beneath Yucca Mountain is “scientifically sound and suitable” and would enhance protection against terrorist attacks by consolidating the waste in an underground desert tomb.
“Proceeding with the repository program is necessary to protect public safety, health and the nation’s security,” Bush said in a letter notifying Congress of his decision.
Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn was outraged. Within hours, Nevada filed suit in federal court, arguing the way the Energy Department came to its conclusions in recommending the site violated a 1982 nuclear waste law. ... A final decision will be left to Congress, but a majority of lawmakers strongly favor disposing of their state’s nuclear waste in Nevada.
While the issue has been debated for more than 20 years, this is the first time a president has formally settled on a site to bury as much as 77,000 tons of nuclear waste.
Currently, more than 40,000 tons of spent nuclear material is being stored in 131 above-ground facilities in 39 states, and 161 million Americans live within 75 miles of these sites.
Some 2,000 tons of nuclear waste is generated every year. Administration officials contend that one central site would meet “compelling national interests” and enhance protection against terrorists.
Yet many contend there is overwhelming scientific evidence that the waste cannot safely be stored at the site without groundwater eventually being contaminated.
Critics also say the Energy Department has virtually ignored the risks of transporting the waste through 43 states, within one mile of 50 million Americans.
Oct. 22, 2003
Evidence Mounts That Yucca Mountain
Dump Is Flawed
Statement by Wenonah Hauter, Director, Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program
The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board’s letter to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) warning that man-made storage containers at Yucca Mountain will probably leak should come as no surprise. Despite a mound of sound scientific evidence demonstrating the flaws of the Yucca Mountain plan, officials at the DOE have been influenced by the nuclear industry instead of by fact in their drive to build a high-level nuclear waste repository. The new finding by the board — the same body that in January 2002 called evidence supporting Yucca Mountain "weak to moderate" — further confirms that the project is unworkable and should be abandoned.
The reliance on engineered barriers to permanently contain dangerously radioactive waste for thousands of years is a huge safety compromise. The original law mandating construction of a permanent waste repository, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, called for a geologic barrier to permanently isolate the waste from the surrounding environment, not a man-made one. When it became apparent that the volcanic rock forming Yucca Mountain could not adequately perform that critical function, the government waived the requirement. This concession is part of a larger pattern of making the laws fit the site, not making the site fit the laws.
Yucca Mountain sits in an earthquake zone where a magnitude 5.6 earthquake damaged a DOE field office in 1992. An earthquake of 4.4 occurred as recently as June 2002. The site itself lies over a freshwater aquifer supplying drinking water to thousands of people; an earthquake could exacerbate the problem of water reaching the tanks, further corroding them and carrying the resulting contamination to the aquifer below. Again, instead of using this evidence to rule out Yucca Mountain, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency changed the law, making the expected level of radioactive contamination in drinking water "permissible," a move now the subject of a lawsuit by Public Citizen and the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The DOE ought to heed the board’s warning and drop the Yucca Mountain project for a safer alternative.
March 28, 2002
Congressional staffers enjoy
‘fact-finding’ in Vegas
Associated Press
WASHINGTON – For a few hours trudging through the Nevada mountain where the government wants to store nuclear waste, dozens of congressional aides and a few of their bosses got two or three days in Las Vegas – at the nuclear industry’s expense.
Since 1999, at least 168 congressional aides and seven house members have taken trips to Yucca Mountain were paid for by the Nuclear Energy Institute, an Associated Press check of congressional travel records found.
The industry is hoping the trips to caverns and casinos will help secure Congress’ approval later this year for Yucca mountain as the nation’s storage site for radioactive waste.
“Staff people say this is a great deal,” said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., opposing the site.
“They have dreams of their trip to Las Vegas. If you just went to Yucca Mountain and came home, it would be an ugly trip.”
The trips to Vegas are considered fact-finding missions – meaning they can be paid for by special interests under congressional rules. The review of congressional records shows the Nuclear Energy Insititute spent more than $208,000 on the trips since 1999.
Several congressional aides described their activities – provided their names not be used.
“We went to a show, I’m not sure who paid,” one aide said. “Liquor was free in the casino,” another added. A third congressional worker said he spent an afternoon in the hotel wave pool, while a fourth recalled an industry-paid dinner at a spectacular revolving restaurant with a view of Vegas....
Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, visited Yucca Mountain at the industry’s expense last year. He spent one night in Las Vegas and defended those who stay longer....
Spokesman Steve Kerekes said the institute targets lawmakers and aides from states with nuclear power plants. “One would hope that members’ constituents would understand their desire and expect them to be on an issue like this,” he said....
From : Fidget@mpinet.net
To : aspartame@yahoogroups.com
Subject : Stop Yucca Mountain
Date : Fri, 31 May 2002
The dangers we face every day from terrorist threats is real. Do we need to add more danger to the equation? Won't you please sign the petition to protect all of us? Please keep forwarding to all on in your address book. Thanks! Regina
I wanted to tell you about a web site called http://nuclearneighborhoods.org .
Within the next 60 days, the US Senate will either approve or reject a plan to ship 77,000 tons of nuclear waste via the nation's highways and railways to a place called Yucca Mountain in Nevada.
A collision or fire involving a 25-ton payload of nuclear waste could kill thousands. Experts estimate that each shipment will contain hundreds of times the long-term radiation released by the Hiroshima bomb. You should also be aware that there is an increased risk of terrorist attack as well....
Excerpts from the book Take the Rich Off Welfare, by Mark Zepezauer and Arthur Naiman:
Nuclear Subsidies:
$7.1 billion a year
As Noam Chomsky points out, most successful US industries wouldn't be competitive internationally if the federal government hadn't developed their basic technology with your tax dollars, then given it away to private companies.
Computers, biotech and commercial aviation are examples, and so-preeminently – is nuclear power.
Nuclear power still can't stand on its own two feet, but with a sugar daddy like the federal government, it doesn't need to.
The feds still provide the industry with most of its fuel and waste disposal, and much of its research. Between 1948 and 1995, the government spent more than $61 billion (in 1995 dollars) on nuclear power research – almost two-thirds of all federal support for energy research and development. The 1996 figure was $468 million.
The insurance subsidy
Since 1959, the government has also limited the liability of nuclear utilities for damage caused by accidents. Until 1988, the utilities were only responsible for the first $560 million per accident; then the limit was raised to $7 billion.
But $7 billion wouldn't begin to cover the costs of a core meltdown, or even a near meltdown like Chernobyl. That accident's total costs are estimated at $358 billion – not to mention the 125,000 deaths the Ukrainian government figures it has caused.
The Energy Information Administration calculates that if nuclear utilities were required to buy insurance coverage above that $7 billion on the open market, it would cost almost $28 million per reactor, for a total annual subsidy of $3 billion....
Enriched uranium fuel
Before 1993, the DOE (Department of Energy) was responsible for all domestic production of enriched uranium fuel for nuclear power plants. Since then, that's been the job of a government corporation called the US Enrichment Corporation (USEC). The USEC has been a financial disaster, even for a government program; taking into account lingering liabilities like environmental cleanups, it's more than $10 billion in the hole.
Having made a fine mess of things, the government plans to privatize the USEC. Naturally, they'll try to give the private company buying USEC as many assets as possible, and keep as many liabilities as they can, so that we and our children can pay for them.
For example, the DOE plans to take large amounts of radioactive waste from the eventually privatized corporation, even though it has no place to safely store them. These liabilities will cost taxpayers an estimated $ 1.1 billion.
But wait-there's more. We lose on the selling price too, which the GAO (Government Accounting Office) estimates at $1.7 to $2.2 billion. Since the net present value of USEC cash flows is $2.8 to $3.5 billion, taxpayers would be out between $600 million and $1.8 billion on the deal. So the total we'll pay for privatizing the USEC will fall between $1.7 and $2.9 billion.
Reprocessing fuel rods
Nuclear power plants create radioactive waste. Naturally, the government feels that it's our responsibility as taxpayers to take this waste and either reprocess it into new fuel rods or find some place to store it for the next 10,000 years or so. Let's talk about reprocessing first.
Argonne National Laboratory (outside of Chicago) used to operate an enormously expensive facility for separating plutonium, uranium and the like from spent nuclear fuel rods, so that these elements could be used in new fuel rods or nuclear weapons. In 1994, Congress killed funding for that, but the same sort of reprocessing is still taking place in Idaho, at an annual cost to us of $25 million.
And Argonne is still getting $25 million a year to terminate its program.
The Savannah River site in South Carolina was originally used for weapons production. As a result of that activity, several square miles of land are so badly contaminated that human beings will probably never be able to use them again. This site is now used for reprocessing spent and corroded fuel rods, and may reprocess foreign fuel rods as well. This new business is going to cost us $340 million a year.
Their waste – our responsibility
A place like Savannah River naturally brings the subject of waste to mind. Nobody wants nuclear waste stored in their state, so Congress picked a place in Nevada, a state with little congressional clout.
Called Yucca Mountain, it's the least stable site of any considered to date, with 33 known earthquake faults in the area.
Work on Yucca Mountain can't proceed until the Supreme Court rules on a law Nevada passed that prohibits the storage of nuclear waste in the state. Yucca Mountain's planned opening has been moved back from 1998 to 2015, but we're still being charged $250 million a year just to study the situation.
If Yucca Mountain does go ahead, it will cost us $33 billion-some say $40 or $50 billion-to build the facility, transport radioactive waste to it from all over the country, and seal the waste into thousands of containers. Meanwhile, there are no long-term storage sites for nuclear waste (and Yucca may never be one either).
The nuclear industry is lobbying hard to build a vastly inadequate short-term storage facility above ground at Yucca Mountain. Their eagerness is explained by the fact that once they turn the waste over to Uncle Sam, it's our problem, not theirs. The Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) says that this whole boondoggle has the potential to turn into "the S&L bailout of the Nineties."
Yucca Mountain is supposed to be financed by the Nuclear Waste Fund, which is generated by charging utility customers a fee of 1/10 ¢ per kilowatt hour for nuclear-generated power. But in its thirteen years of existence, the fund has never been adjusted for inflation, which has cut its purchasing power by 45%.
There's another catch: The funds come from existing reactors, and no new ones are on order in the US. As the old reactors are retired, the fund's revenues will decline and ultimately disappear, leaving taxpayers holding the bag.
And there's another problem: Money in the fund is currently being used to pay for interim storage, which depletes the amount available for Yucca Mountain (or whatever long-term storage site is eventually decided on).
If everything remains unchanged, the Nuclear Waste Fund will fall $4-$8 billion (in 1995 dollars) short of the money it needs, according to the DOE and the State of Nevada....
# # #
FOR MORE SCARY NUCLEAR STORIES & TALES OF
NATIONAL (HA!) SECURITY,
GO TO
\/
\/
\/
BIRDS THAT DRINK FROM CESSPOOLS
THE BRIBES & BOONDOGGLES OF BOEING
CONDOLEEZZA AND THE CHICKEN HAWKS
CONFESSIONS OF A WHISTLEBLOWER
DIRTY MONEY, DIRTY POLITICS & BISHOP ESTATE
TARNISHED WINGS: THE GREED AT LOCKHEED
THE SILENCE OF THE WHISTLEBLOWERS
VULTURES IN THE U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY
WESTINGHOUSE...WHITHER GOEST THOU?
THE WTO: THE WEALTHY TAKING OVER
~ o ~
MORE OF THE CATBIRD’S FAVORITE LINKS
~ o ~
FAIR USE NOTICE. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Last Update July 7, 2007 by The Catbird