MARK WAITE / PVT Doug Smith, a resident of Humboldt County in northern California, at left, talks to Darrell Lacy, director of the Nye County nuclear waste project office, during the open house at the public hearing on Yucca Mountain at the LongStreet Inn and Casino Monday night. MARK WAITE / PVT Barry Lawson, facilitator for the Yucca Mountain public hearing, addresses the audience at the LongStreet Inn and Casino Monday night. MARK WAITE / PVT Bob Halstead addresses the Yucca Mountain hearing. Advertisement

AMARGOSA VALLEY -- Nevada officials have pushed the U.S. Department of Energy for years to make a railroad to Yucca Mountain available for dual use.

Now that the DOE has publicly stated it will let commercial freight shippers use the rail line -- both in the environmental impact statement and on a placard at the public hearing here Monday -- the State of Nevada plans to sue the DOE over it.

"The argument may be, if it's a shared use line, you have to build it like any other railroad. You have to go before the Surface Transportation Board and get construction authorization. That means the guy who really knows about railroad building," said Bob Halstead, transportation advisor for the State of Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects.

Halstead urged Nevada residents to order the EIS and study it closely, particularly if they are concerned about ranching.

"The biggest impacts on the land frankly don't have anything to do with nuclear waste. They have to do with the fact you're building a railroad," Halstead said.

He described the logistics of "building a 300 to 350 mile crushed stone wall with a railroad on top of it." The DOE will have to drill 175 wells for dust suppression, which could affect water supplies used by ranchers. Large quarries would be needed to supply ballast. Grazing allotments will be crossed.

Halstead said the estimated cost of the rail line has increased from $800 million to $3 billion, but the DOE doesn't want to spend an additional $20 million to $30 million for alternatives that would have less impact on ranching, mining and recreation. The EIS identifies different routes through places like Coal Valley, Garden Valley and in particular, the Goldfield Mining District.

Halstead complained the DOE has now decided to ship the hottest nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, which is twice as dangerous thermally and radioactively, than letting it cool for five to 10 years at the reactor sites.

"The National Academy of Sciences spent three years recently studying nuclear waste transportation. They concluded, as did the state of Nevada, nuclear fuel can be shipped safely. But can be shipped safely and will be shipped safely are two very different things," Halstead said.

Halstead's speech put a damper on pro-Yucca Mountain positions by Nye County and nuclear energy officials.

Nye County Commissioner Joni Eastley said the county was never consulted about the original selection of Yucca Mountain. But Nye County commissioners refuse to assume the State of Nevada will prevail in its opposition to Yucca Mountain, Eastley said.

Eastley said "it would be dangerous and irresponsible not to constructively engage DOE during this process."

Nye County concluded after $30 million worth of studies Yucca Mountain is not only technically feasible, but it can be done safely, Eastley said.

"The time has come to either advance or terminate this program based on its merits," she said. "We need to see an end to the stalling tactics and politicizing of science and bring this project to a conclusion."

Paul Seidler, senior director of the Nuclear Energy Institute, said 150 million Americans live within 75 miles of nuclear power plants. Commissioner Butch Borasky said he used to live within 100 miles of three nuclear power plants in central New York state.

Rod McMullen, director of the NEI Washington D.C. office, said he looked forward to licensing hearings before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission when opponents can challenge the project before impartial judges.

Inyo County, California repository office project coordinator Matt Gaffney had concerns over flows into the carbonate aquifer below Death Valley coming from Yucca Mountain. He said the EIS didn't consider the socioeconomic impacts to Inyo County, which is 15 miles from Yucca Mountain.

Jennifer Viereck, from Tecopa, Calif., who is executive director of Healing Ourselves and Mother Earth, felt intimidated by all the nuclear industry executives. She advocated green energy like wind and solar. Viereck also begged to differ on statements saying there are no nearby streams, pointing to the Amargosa River.

"Legal ownership of this land will be necessary in the licensing process and cannot be proved. All of the land lies within the treaty lands of the Western Shoshone nation which was ratified in 1863," Viereck said.

A handful of anti-nuclear activists stood up to complain. Carl Dyken said he opposed uranium mining, nuclear power and nuclear waste.

'I believe the process for Yucca Mountain is really the push for more nukes," said Ryan Wiegel, of Sacramento.

"Someone said in the last five years they found out Yucca Mountain is safer than it was even thought it was five years ago. Well, what are they going to find out in the next five years? We're talking about a million years," said Paul Bloom of San Francisco.