Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NV: Nevada lists nuke rail line woes - Planned transport would disrupt much in state
The Las Vegas Sun ^ | March 31, 2004 | Cy Ryan

Posted on 04/01/2004 8:02:05 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach

March 31, 2004

Nevada lists nuke rail line woes

Planned transport would disrupt much in state

By Cy Ryan
<cy@lasvegassun.com>

SUN CAPITAL BUREAU

CARSON CITY -- A proposed railroad line that would stretch from the Caliente area to Yucca Mountain for the transportation of nuclear waste would disrupt mining, ranching and recreational activities in Nevada, the state says.

The rail line, even without an accident, would cause health hazards to workers, could cross land that is sacred to Native Americans and could interfere with the applications of water rights sought by the Southern Nevada Water Authority, the state wrote to federal officials Monday.

The comments were in the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects' official response to the proposal of the Department of Energy to withdraw 308,600 acres for the 300-mile line. "DOE's (the Energy Department's) request for an administrative land withdrawal is unnecessary and an unwarranted restriction of other legitimate public uses of these federal lands within Nevada," the state's filing noted.

The state is asking the Bureau of Land Management, which controls the land, to reject the application of the Energy Department, saying the application is premature. Lawsuits are pending that challenge the selection of Yucca Mountain.

"In light of this pending litigation, BLM should defer any action on DOE's land withdrawal request pending the outcome of the state's legal challenges," said the state. It also alleged the Energy Department's application was technically defective.

It said the BLM should cancel its decision to set aside the area for two years before it makes a final decision.

The state said the Energy Department has failed to draft a national transportation plan to route the radioactive waste to Nevada from other states. And it said that there have not been any public hearings on the application to withdraw the land from public use.

The Energy Department plan calls for a corridor one mile wide for the trains, but the state says that is "widely excessive" and should be only one-quarter of a mile at the most. It says that of the five rail access options, the Energy Department's preferred route is the second-longest, at 319 miles, and the most expensive, at $880 million. And the route "will be challenged by rugged topography" including four mountain crossings that range up to 6,293 feet above sea level.

The Bureau of Land Management must perform an Environmental Impact Statement before taking any action, the state office said. It also said the Energy Department's studies were "woefully inadequate."

The state agency said ranchers who have grazing allotments and access to the lands in question will be affected in Meadow Valley, Reveille Valley and Oasis Valley.

Railroad yards, construction camps and access roads would limit grazing areas for ranchers. And those ranchers have never even been informed about the Energy Department's intent to carve out this corridor, the state's filing alleges.

Existing mining claims may be located within the one-mile corridor of the proposed line. And the withdrawal of this land will curtail mineral exploration, the state response says.

"The entire Caliente corridor lies within lands claimed by the Western Shoshone Nation under the Ruby Valley Treaty," according to the filing. "DOE has acknowledged that the corridor may cross traditional holy lands important to the Southern Paiute, Western Shoshone, and Owens Valley Paiute and Shoshone People."

There could be "significant impacts on water resources" if the Energy Department gains control of these lands, the state said. It added that the BLM should evaluate the impact of the land withdrawal on the applications for water rights filed by the Southern Nevada Water Authority to supply Las Vegas. "In addition, rights of way the Authority has for future pipeline corridors might be transected by the proposed rail corridor," the state said.

There are a number of areas located within or adjacent to the lands that are currently under consideration for designation as federal wilderness areas, according to the comments by the state.

The state also said the BLM should evaluate the impact to threatened and endangered species as well as to the sensitive lands in the more than 300,000 acres to be withdrawn.

An accident or a terrorist attack along the route could result in the rupturing of a rail cask containing spent nuclear fuel. Cleanup costs could exceed $10 billion, the state said.

Even without an accident the cumulative routine radiation from the shipping casks could pose a health threat to certain transportation workers, the state said.

In extreme cases, these workers could receive large enough doses to increase their risk of cancer by 10 percent or more, the state said.

"Even without an accident or incident, property values near routes could decline by 3 percent or more. In the event of an accident, residential property values along shipping routes could decline between 8 percent and 34 percent, depending upon the severity of the accident," the state's filing said.

It's premature for the BLM to act on this application in part because transportation of the spent fuel could not begin until 2010 and even if the state can't stop Yucca Mountain, shipments probably won't start until 2015 or later, the filing noted.

The DOE's plan is to haul 70,000 metric tons of heavy metal of spent nuclear fuel and high level radioactive waste to Yucca Mountain over 24 years. The plans call for a train with two 3,000-horsepower, diesel-electric locomotives pulling one to five rail cars containing the waste. There would be buffer cars and escort cars. There would be one to five trains per week.

The state said if the BLM plans to process the application, it should, at a minimum, first hold public hearings in Las Vegas, Reno, Caliente and Tonopah.




TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Technical; US: Nevada
KEYWORDS: artbell; cacti; gilamonsters; hyperbole; itsadesertwasteland; lotsofdust; nucalear; nuclear; rattlesnakes; skyisfalling; tarantulas; totalbs; tumbleweeds; yuccamountain
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Sorry Nevada. You've been designated as a National Sacrifice Zone. Shut up and bend over.
21 posted on 04/03/2004 2:08:39 PM PST by blowfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
How do dispose of your garbage?

You pay someone to take it.

LVM

22 posted on 04/03/2004 2:44:17 PM PST by LasVegasMac ("If everything is just barely under control......you are not going fast enough" - MA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LasVegasMac
Exactly. You pay the people who take it, and you pay the people who own the land where you bury it.

You're still not answering my question.

Why should the state of Nevada, who doesn't own the land, be paid some sort of fee?

Should the federal government pay each state a fee for the use of their own land? Where does this craziness end?

23 posted on 04/03/2004 5:59:29 PM PST by Dog Gone (End Freepathons. Join the Dollar a Day Club!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Exactly the response I expected.

Yes, the Fed does own a lot of this state. Does that mean we passively accept the Fed's desire to dump all nuc waste here? No. How would you feel if the Fed decided that your state was to become the new site for all surrounding states garbage?

This is where I live. This crap will be going over highways that I - and many others drive on. Through our cities and towns. When the rail system gets worked out, it is still there. In a geologic active area. Right handy that the Fed ignores that. But I'm sure you believe them. As do all that want to ship their crap somewhere else.

Take your Fed attitude and flush it, pal.

I really wish the shoe was on the other foot.

Would you still be with the argument for the Fed?

LVM

24 posted on 04/03/2004 6:12:18 PM PST by LasVegasMac ("If everything is just barely under control......you are not going fast enough" - MA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LasVegasMac
Tell us how you will be damaged or shut up.
25 posted on 04/03/2004 6:31:41 PM PST by Dog Gone (End Freepathons. Join the Dollar a Day Club!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
bite me, Mr. Smart Ass.

You obviously don't have the brain power to think this through, now do you.

You think it is just fine that this is rammed down this states' throat and no one has - nor should have - any objection.

Your total arguement is that the Fed says it's ok, so shut up Nevada and take it. Tell me, do you remember when you were assimilated?

The thought process of people like you do nothing but insure that the Fed keeps growing into areas where it has no business.

You tell me why this state should be forced to take your (you are the "them" for arguments sake) nuclear waste.

Don't bother to reply if you can't provide an intelligent answer.

LVM

26 posted on 04/03/2004 7:14:10 PM PST by LasVegasMac ("If everything is just barely under control......you are not going fast enough" - MA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: LasVegasMac
You didn't respond as to how Nevada will be damaged and why it needs to be compensated in advance by me. So, if you want to turn this is into an insult match, forget it. I'll just assume you have have no answer.
27 posted on 04/03/2004 8:04:29 PM PST by Dog Gone (End Freepathons. Join the Dollar a Day Club!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
You didn't respond as to how Nevada will be damaged and why it needs to be compensated in advance by me.

Yes, I have. Not my fault if you missed it.

Why should this state have to prove anything?

Poor logic for an arguement, if you ask me.

So you won't mind if I start running truck / train loads of hazardous waste down your town's streets. And you won't mind if I tell you that I'm going to dump that hazardous waste in an unstable storage area. I'm telling you it is safe, therefore it is.

You are fixated on the fact that because the Fed says its ok, that is good enough for you.

You prove how your state will be damaged by NOT shipping the crap to my state.

Nevada did not generate your waste, nor benefit from the process that generated that waste.

Tell me why we should be forced to take the garbage?

Your state made it, you keep it. Again, prove how your state will be damaged in doing so.

LVM

28 posted on 04/03/2004 8:34:17 PM PST by LasVegasMac ("If everything is just barely under control......you are not going fast enough" - MA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: LasVegasMac
It's a pretty fundamental legal principle that the party claiming damages has to prove them before they can be awarded.

You can't.

Whining about stuff going down the street doesn't cut it.

If and when Nevada suffers damages from this, there will be no question that the federal government will rush in to repair the damage and compensate anyone who was harmed.

The notion that Nevada should be sent big checks for whining ranks right there with the concept of slavery reparations on the absurdity scale.

29 posted on 04/04/2004 8:35:14 AM PDT by Dog Gone (End Freepathons. Join the Dollar a Day Club!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson