Yucca nuclear report's facts faked - Bush Energy Dept. says it's 'sound'

[bigtree]

02/18/2006 12:00 AM PST

Nuclear report's facts faked

Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Work on the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump, though performed by federal employees who apparently made up facts, was scientifically sound, an Energy Department report said Friday.

The Energy Department released the 144-page report nearly a year after disclosing the existence of e-mails written by U.S. Geological Survey hydrologists indicating they fabricated facts, deleted inconvenient data and kept one set of documents for themselves and another for quality assurance officials.

The e-mails were written from 1998 through 2004 by scientists using computer models to determine how quickly precipitation could make its way through the dump site in the desert 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The dump is planned as a national repository for 77,000 tons of used commercial reactor fuel and defense waste now waiting at sites in 39 states.

However, Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico will redo the computer models because quality assurance rules weren't complied with, Golan said.

"The DOE, which failed to prevent the falsification of scientific data on Yucca Mountain projects in the first place, now wants us to believe that the falsifications made no difference in the quality of the work. That's absurd," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in a joint press release with Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev.

story: http://www.presstelegram.com/news/ci_3521470

[bigtree]

1. Okay DU. Let this fall. But remember this post

when you hear of Bush's radio address today promoting two new technologies that are supposed to take care of nuclear waste. They can't even get their act together to open Yucca and they want us to trust them with entirely new, unproven methods of nuclear waste disposal. Their real goal? To make nuclear energy acceptable to the majority of Americans who are rightly concerned about where they will dispose of the waste. Those concerns should also include the nuclear workers who are not being given proper protections from exposure to radiation and are not afforded any recourse when they do become exposed. These articles published today are more than troubling:


Report raises concerns about benefits for nuclear workers

ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON - The government has paid about $1.5 billion in benefits to thousands of sick nuclear weapons workers under a five-year-old program, but more could be done for thousands of others, says a report by a federal official. The report, made public Friday, was the first written by Donald Shalhoub, the ombudsman to the Labor Department program. He wrote that workers have reported frustration with a requirement that they obtain workplace records, some of which are more than 50 years old. In many cases, the report said, records ‘‘were not maintained at the time of exposure, or if made, were lost or destroyed.’’ In addition, workers thought the government takes too long to estimate how much radiation workers were exposed to.

‘‘Otherwise eligible claimants may die while waiting for a result,’’ the report said.

http://www.chieftain.com/national/1140277450/12


and this one:


Program for sick nuclear workers targeted for cut

Rocky Mountain News
February 18, 2006

The Bush administration has proposed cutting $686 million from the program to aid Rocky Flats and other nuclear weapons plant workers who were sickened on the job by radiation and toxic chemicals. The proposal amounts to a 44 percent reduction in a program that had an estimated budget this year of $1.56 billion. The program pays for medical care and $150,000 or more in compensation for cancer and other often deadly illnesses tied to the job. In the part of the program dealing with toxic chemicals and less common ailments, 35,000 of 37,000 applications have yet to be processed, according to the Department of Labor Web site. In the part of the program for cancer and beryllium disease, 14,000 of 51,000 applications have yet to be finished.

Tens of thousands more sick workers have sought compensation than originally expected. Many have been unable to find records of their employment or their exposures. Others could not prove their jobs caused their diseases. Nationally, 23,371 applications have been denied.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4477117,00.html


the Bush administration wants to push past all of this and spend scarce funds for another unproven boondoggle. Here's an explanation of what is entailed in their proposal:


Bush's Budget to Call for Nuclear Partnership With Russia

The American program, once called the Global Nuclear Energy Initiative, will now be called an energy "partnership" to reflect the role of Russia and, eventually, other nations.

. . . the administration sees the plan as a way to promote the use of nuclear power at home by solving problems with the disposal of radioactive waste. The energy secretary is supposed to tell Congress next year whether a second dump, beyond the Yucca Mountain site near Las Vegas, will be needed. But it is not clear when even the Yucca site can be opened.

The new plan relies on an experimental "fast" reactor that has been tried in France and Japan and found to be prone to catching fire and not cost-effective.

The program would also require changes in American law to allow the dumping of foreign-generated waste at Yucca, and it would face fierce domestic opposition because it would create a fuel processing industry that, because it converts solid waste into liquids that could leak, would be potentially more polluting than the current industry.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/04/politics/04nuke.html?ex=1296709200&en=f1e8b4639ffb4031&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss


so, let this go. believe in the hype about 'safe' nuclear energy, although all of the research is to be done at sites that are still cleaning up the nuclear waste from the '50's. believe in these new technologies which are yet unproven and not even being actively pursued, despite over $70 billion allocated to the initiative last year. believe in Bush. Tell me how - despite the fact we are being sold on this by a meglomaniac, warmongering liar - nuclear energy production should be expanded by this administration. Tell me how I should trust them. I've heard it here before and it disgusts me that folks can allow themselves to be sold on this crap by an administration and an industry which has consistently put their greed ahead of our lives and safety.

[DELUSIONAL]

2. kick

[Maine-ah]

3. K&R

[bigtree]

4. kick

[Nothing Without Hope]

5. Very important. Sent to Greatest Page. They lied about global warming

and about just about everything else that stood in the way of profits and power too.

This needs to be widely exposed. It's DANGEROUS, which is opposite the main reason why Kook-Aid drinkers still support Bush, thinking he will protect them. Instead, we have US ports turned over to terrorist supporters and nuclear waste poisoning people for generations to come.

[midnight]

6. Why Nuclear power?

Solar power is renewable, cleaner, safer, and will create new jobs. I guess that is why they fired all those engineers and researchers of alternative energy. This makes very little sense to me.

[noamnety]

7. "Three outside experts"

Anyone know who those were?

[bigtree]

9. I took awhile looking through the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste

Management's report. Ther seems to be no value in who did the review since they are going back and using other studies done years ago and collected data from years past to bolster their argument that the falsifying that was done is minor and don't significantly affect the results- don't show any significant risk of water seepage. Bullshit of course, but, you can see how they are attempting to put the lid on this-


first, here's the page where they attempt to put the lid on the scandal with 'technical' reports:


Evaluation of Technical Impact On the Yucca Mountain Project Technical Basis Resulting From Issues
Raised By Emails of Former Project Participants-
http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/newsroom/evaluation.shtml

here's the report that contains the e-mails:
http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/newsroom/documents/evaluation/evaluation.pdf

e-mail samples:

Date: 12/17/98
Subject: Re: AP 3.10Q
I agree with your analysis. We only win if we get the final product out. I have to think through this
carefully but where I’m headed is this. ______and I will make sure we get the 96 report done (you need
to call ______ ASAP, just in case she needs input from you on Friday) . You, on the other hand, need to start the FY99 report, assuming the FY96 gets approved. You need to lay out the changes you’ve made to the model, how you’ve tested or calibrated those changes (stream gage, neutron (I’ve already started working on a new neutron hole analysis which I had hoped to finish this vacation but won’t be done until later I’m sure)), what the results are, and what difference it makes. Do this for the site scale as your basis for the change to the model and as the basis of the report. Then start another report, which uses the first report, to lay out the regional model. Both report will address past and future climates. That’s where I’m heading but I’m not there yet. We can discuss this tomorrow. ______
The bottom line is forget about the money, we need a product or we’re screwed and will take the blame.
EVERYBODY will say they told us to go ahead without a plan or budget in place (even though ____ said
no hires). This is now CYA and we had better be good at it. I seem to have let this one slip a little to much in an attempt to cover all our work (and get us the hell out of the long term problem of Yucca
Mountain) but now it’s clear that we have little to no choice. In all honestly I’ve never felt well managed or helped by the USGS YMP folks, in fact, as you know, I’ve often felt abandoned. This time it’s no different, or worse, and we have to work together to get out of this one. I’m still overwhelmed trying to protect the rest of the program from the ravages of what’s happening in Denver (funding, which we seem to be blamed for because we got funding) and the current HDP fiascoes in the ESF. That is to say we’re not working on our own as we have for the past 12 years, now were being threatened (and carefully watched) by the people who use to simply ignore us. These are very dangerous time, both funding wise and professionally. Mark my words on this one, it will not be long before our technical credibility with be challenged in an attempt to discredit us and redirect funding!
Oh, by the way, you did a great job in response to ______ request. Bravo!!
(keep my last paragraph prvate or among friends, if you know who they are)
_______________________________

Date: 03/15/99
Subject: Re: Tiger Team Hell
This memo actually hits the nail on the head. You are exactly right: One, yes, we will do the work, Two, yes, screw the tiger team (I don’t know how yet but I’ll figure it out), Three, yes, destroy this memo!
_________________________________

Date: 03/15/99
Subject: Re: Tiger Team Hell
____________and I have been trying to figure out what’s really coming at us with the tiger team effort. So far we’ve learned that they don’t have a solid plan of action yet. I’ve formulated a “potential impact list” that is prioritized according to what work gets impacted 1 st ; 1. FY99 support to PA (includes all the workshop stuff), 2. regional recharge report, 3. site-scale infiltration modeling report. Some of the work the tt effort calls for was scheduled under 22001 QA anyway, but we started hearing rumors of things like re-doing all the QA work for the neutron logging data, which will stop us dead in the water.

Now I’m going to give you the inside scoop: I’m going to continue the regional modeling, even if it
means ignoring direct orders from YMP management. I’m also going to be working on reports, even if it
means ignoring direct orders from YMP management. ______ and I have a pretty clear vision of the type
of work that needs to be done to stay alive for the long-haul, and it very definitely involves getting
product out there for the users and the public to see. The Death Valley regional modeling work fits that bill. Screwing around with tiger teams does not. In the end, it’s going to be the reports that move everything else forward. The tiger team efforts will just be vaporized. So, the work may be slowed, but I will not let it stop. At this point, I am still working to the plan that we’ve all spent a significant amount of time on to make things happen for FY99. That’s the insider scoop. The position we will take for the M&O planners may be much different. So delete this memo after you’ve read it.
______

__________________________

Date: 03/22/99
Subject: Re: Just Checking In

4. Scientific notebook OK (not perfect, but I’m getting help from _____ in this department).
5. For now, I’m hiding out from all tiger teams, like some outlaw in a Spaghetti Western. We’re
heading underground with the real work. Tell ______ he was supposed to destroy that memo.

_____________________________

Date: 04/22/99
Subject: status of new climate net-infiltration modeling
I thought I’d give you a “heads up” on the progress of work I’ve been doing with the results you’ve
provided. Model simulations have been in progress but about 3 weeks ago I found a small error in the
model input that was generated using the EarthInfo data. The error was minor but would have created a
QA nightmare so this was fixed and the simulations are being re-done (I’ll send you a summary of the
results when I get to this point). I am about to submit a “developed datapackage” milestone consisting of the climate input files (7 files for the 7 sites you identified) that are being used by the net-infiltration model. The input files are basically re-formatted EarthInfo export files with a minor amount of parameter estimation occurring to fill small gaps in the record (even for the high ranking sites, there are gaps all over the place).

Here’s the weird news; to get this milestone through QA, I must state that I have arbitrarily selected the analog sites. At first, I was going to include your email as supporting information in the data package, and discuss the work we did using the worksheets consisting of candidate sites, but since there is no DTN for your results the message I am getting from QA is that I can’t use or refer to those results. In other words, I was trying to give you credit for your part in all this, as well as provide all info possible for the traceability of the analog climates, but this seems to create problems rather then solving them. So for the record, the seven analog sites have been arbitrarily (randomly) selected. Hopefully these sites will by coincidence match sites you have identified.
______
P.S. please destroy this memo

___________________________________

Date: 04/22/99
Subject: Re: QA
What if you just download the raw files from EarthInfo and say you used those? Do they need to know
any more than that? You don’t really need to do an analysis just say this is the data I used. Maybe that would work.
________________________________

Date: 04/22/99
Subject: QA
The QA bullshit grows deeper. I may need to say that I did everything by hand for the data package I am
submitting that You and ______ reviewed. The program I wrote is not in the system and QA will be all
over it like flies on &%#$. All references to ______ are being deleted. Here’s my question: When we go to start QA’ing the site-scale modeling work, will I get taken to the cleaners because I am not referencing either a tech procedure or a scientific notebook? In other words, would it be cost-effective to create a SN for the site-scale work and back-date the whole thing?? Can’t wait to be far-far away from here!
______________________________________

Date: 01/06/00
Subject: Re: AMR U0010 ______ called. Yes, this is really happening. ______ and ______ will help but it seems I am stuck going to LBNL on the 26th (______ and ______ will also go for moral support). Responses to the LBNL
comments are due on the 21st. There is, of course, no scientific notebook for this work. All work is in the form of electronic files. I can show auditors input, output, and program files, but it is not clear to me how to show documentation of work in progress. They may be expecting to see something that at least looks like a scientific notebook documenting work in progress. I can start making something up but then the CA projects will need to go on hold. If I continue placing ______ tasks as 1st priority for January, I will be ill prepared for the audit, and will likely get hammered. That’s fine by me. I am far more concerned about the CA projects than I am about the AMR. But ______will be rather unhappy, and I will need help trying to figure out a good excuse why 100% of my time did not go into the audit without revealing the CA projects.
I am open for suggestions.

_____________________________________

Date: 03/30/00
Subject: Installations
______
The programs, of course, are all already installed otherwise the AMR would not exist. I don’t have a clue when these programs were installed. So I’ve made up the dates and names (see red edits below). This is as good as its going to get. If they need more proof I will be happy to make up more stuff, as long as its not a video recording of the software being installed.
______________________________________

Date: 1/18/01
Subject: Re: INFIL VTP
Good catch. XX is place holder. Change to “section 7.0 of ITP”. I expected more errors would surface, so I’m glad to hear you had the chance to double check everything before sending to CP1. Do I now print out the signatures pages with the new dates, sign these, and overnight to ______? Sounds like you need to lie to ITSMA about when the comparison test was performed, because I am not going to redo this. Someone will need to change all the file dates. Or I email you all the inputs and you can redo the test. Of course then you need to show what CPU was used on all the documents, and run the ITP.
_________________________________________

Date: 02/20/01
Subject: Re: ______ effort for Infiltration for the Low-Temperature TSPA
I talked with ______ on the phone today. I told him we could be ready to send out 1st batch of results by the 26th, but not if this would look screwy because USGS can’t start work until SN is in place.______strongly implied to me that he wants to stick by the rules, and we should not be conducting work until the SN is in place. But we can’t finish the SN until ______ responds to ______’s questions. I will need to make the apparent schedule slip unless they can figure out the YMP-QA stupidities by COB today. If we don’t let the schedule slip, they will catch on that it takes much less time to get the results out than what we say it takes.
_____________________________________


related:

Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., called the report "laughable" and "ridiculous."
http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nevada/2006/feb/17/021710412.html

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Feb-18-Sat-2006/news/5953256.html

[MadHound]

8. Scary stuff, I would be moving away from Las Vegas and Southern CA

Here pretty soon. The precipitation moves through the complex quicker than originally reported. And what has been underreported is that the EPA did dye tests years ago on Yucca Mt. The time it took for the dye to go from Yucca Mt to Las Vegas groundwater was two weeks. Another two weeks after that and the dye was showing up in the groundwater of southern California.

Got dose?:scared:

[bigtree]

10. downstreamers

bummer.

[johnaries]

11. If it "made no difference", then why go to the trouble of faking it?

And storage is only part of the problem. How do you get the material there to be stored? How many populated areas does this highly dangerous material have to travel through? Probablity tells us that sooner or later there WILL be a transportation accident involving radioactive material.

Sorry, I just can't support Nuclear Energy with the current technology. The waste produced is just too dangerous.

[bigtree]

12. you've likely seen the map

the routes go through (almost) every state.

[johnaries]

14. Yep, and if we EXPAND it, it WILL go through every state.

An eventual severe accident simply cannot be avoided under those circumstances. It's just a matter of time.

[Hubert Flottz]

13. I hope John Ensign, R-Nev has grandchildren who live next door

Who expected the Bush gang to tell the truth, who trusted them? * IDIOTS, that's who!