Skip to main content

Another Letter on Yucca Mountain

sensenbrenner2 Yesterday, we told you about a letter sent by 91 legislators to Energy Secretary Steven Chu. In this story about the letter, writer Steve Tetreault uncovers another letter writing effort:

Meanwhile, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., was seeking lawmakers to sign a letter to NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko questioning whether three of the commissioners might have "pre-judged" the Yucca issue.

In a draft copy obtained Tuesday, Sensenbrenner contends that three nominees who were confirmed faced "intense pressure" from Sens. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Harry Reid, D-Nev., at their confirmation hearing in February.

We were there at that hearing and it’s the closest we’ve seen Sen. Reid come to inserting himself into Yucca Mountain issues – and he wasn’t even there, as Boxer relayed the question from him to the NRC candidates.

However, we’d quibble with the “intense pressure” characterization. Reid’s question was whether the three candidates would second-guess DOE’s decision to shutter Yucca Mountain. All three said no. That was it – we don’t recall any follow-up on the issue from Boxer or anyone else at the hearing.

Not second-guessing the decision and voting to affirm Yucca Mountain as the used fuel repository (because closing it conflicts with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act – see the post below for more on this) are two different things and do not necessarily contradict each other. But we grant that Sensenbrenner is taking care here:

"We think it was an inappropriate commitment," Sensenbrenner's draft letter said. "The commission should examine each case on its merits, rather than pre-judging an argument. We hope the entire Commission considers the ... decision in an objective manner."

We hope so, too. We took a look at Sensenbrenner’s Web site to see if he had posted his letter. Not yet. Check here later in the day to see if he has it up. (He has on his home page a little doomsday clock counting the national debt – quite hypnotic.)

Sen. James Sensenbrenner wants you to know.

Comments

Pete said…
Whether or not the commissioners were pressured to pre-judge the Yucca Mountain issue may not be as important as the fact that they HAVE indeed pre-judged the issue. This was covered in another Steve Tetreault column last week in the Pahrump Valley Times:

Three NRC commissioners -- William Magwood, George Apostolakis and William Ostendorff -- were asked directly at their Senate confirmation hearings in February whether they would "second guess" DOE on Yucca Mountain. Each said no.

But (Lake) Barrett (former director of Yucca Mountain program) said it was "highly irregular" for nominees to be asked flat out during confirmation how they might rule on an issue, and the commissioners may be challenged on those grounds.

"The three new commissioners will have to decide whether they can actually vote on the matter since many people think they were compromised during the confirmation process," Barrett said.


http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2010/Jul-02-Fri-2010/news/36702668.html
SteveK9 said…
This has nothing to do with Nuclear energy, but since you chose to mention it, I wonder if Sensenbrenner had his cute clock ticking during the time that Bush turned Clinton surpluses into deficits, primarily through tax cuts for wealthy individuals? During a period of GDP growth when we should have continued with surpluses.
DocForesight said…
@SteveK9 -- Kindly define "wealthy".

I would prefer to keep my comments restricted to the subject of this blog, but if you insist on opening that door, someone may step in.

OTOH, there are plenty of political or current-event blogs and sites on which to opine about those matters. Just direct people to the site you prefer to engage you in that discussion. Fair?

Popular posts from this blog

Sneak Peek

There's an invisible force powering and propelling our way of life.
It's all around us. You can't feel it. Smell it. Or taste it.
But it's there all the same. And if you look close enough, you can see all the amazing and wondrous things it does.
It not only powers our cities and towns.
And all the high-tech things we love.
It gives us the power to invent.
To explore.
To discover.
To create advanced technologies.
This invisible force creates jobs out of thin air.
It adds billions to our economy.
It's on even when we're not.
And stays on no matter what Mother Nature throws at it.
This invisible force takes us to the outer reaches of outer space.
And to the very depths of our oceans.
It brings us together. And it makes us better.
And most importantly, it has the power to do all this in our lifetime while barely leaving a trace.
Some people might say it's kind of unbelievable.
They wonder, what is this new power that does all these extraordinary things?

A Design Team Pictures the Future of Nuclear Energy

For more than 100 years, the shape and location of human settlements has been defined in large part by energy and water. Cities grew up near natural resources like hydropower, and near water for agricultural, industrial and household use.

So what would the world look like with a new generation of small nuclear reactors that could provide abundant, clean energy for electricity, water pumping and desalination and industrial processes?

Hard to say with precision, but Third Way, the non-partisan think tank, asked the design team at the Washington, D.C. office of Gensler & Associates, an architecture and interior design firm that specializes in sustainable projects like a complex that houses the NFL’s Dallas Cowboys. The talented designers saw a blooming desert and a cozy arctic village, an old urban mill re-purposed as an energy producer, a data center that integrates solar panels on its sprawling flat roofs, a naval base and a humming transit hub.

In the converted mill, high temperat…

Seeing the Light on Nuclear Energy

If you think that there is plenty of electricity, that the air is clean enough and that nuclear power is a just one among many options for meeting human needs, then you are probably over-focused on the United States or Western Europe. Even then, you’d be wrong.

That’s the idea at the heart of a new book, “Seeing the Light: The Case for Nuclear Power in the 21st Century,” by Scott L. Montgomery, a geoscientist and energy expert, and Thomas Graham Jr., a retired ambassador and arms control expert.


Billions of people live in energy poverty, they write, and even those who don’t, those who live in places where there is always an electric outlet or a light switch handy, we need to unmake the last 200 years of energy history, and move to non-carbon sources. Energy is integral to our lives but the authors cite a World Health Organization estimate that more than 6.5 million people die each year from air pollution.  In addition, they say, the global climate is heading for ruinous instability. E…