WASHINGTON — The powerful chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee said Thursday the nation's strategy for dealing with nuclear waste should be focused on developing a federal repository at Yucca Mountain.

But Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., stopped short of saying he outright opposed a temporary nuclear waste storage facility like the one proposed by the Private Fuel Storage consortium of nuclear power companies for Goshute tribal lands in Tooele County.

"I don't know whether the Skull Valley site will receive the regulatory approval it needs, that's not my decision," he said during debate on the energy bill. "However, in my view, our focus should remain on a solution that puts this waste directly in the hands of the federal government."

Domenici's comments came in response to questioning on the Senate floor from Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, who with Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, have proposed an amendment to the energy bill that specifies that all spent nuclear fuel would have to go to a facility owned by the federal government.

Since the PFS project is private, it would be barred from accepting waste under the Hatch-Bennett amendment, which also calls for a study into recycling nuclear waste. Hatch and Bennett agreed not to pursue a Senate vote on their amendment at this time.

But Hatch used Thursday's debate on the Senate floor to launch a blistering attack on PFS and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

"A few nuclear power utilities are attempting to hijack our nation's nuclear waste strategy by joining forces to build an away-from-reactor, above-ground storage site for one-half of our nation's high level nuclear waste on a tiny Indian reservation in Tooele, Utah," Hatch said.

"Even more unfortunate, the only tribe they could con into taking this waste was the Skull Valley Band of the Goshutes, whose small reservation just happens to sit on one of the most dangerous sites you could imagine for storing high level nuclear waste."

Hatch said it is "baffling" that the environmental impact study for the PFS project does not even require PFS to have on-site means to handle damaged or breached casks.

"Rather, the NRC staff concluded the risk of a cask breach is so minimal that they did not have to consider such a scenario in their EIS. I find this conclusion dubious and dangerous," he said.

He also said the nation learned from the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks of the risk of suicide air attacks — something that has not even been considered by the NRC for the PFS project, which could receive its NRC license later this summer.

"It would seem inconceivable that a government entity would consider giving their endorsement of the PFS plan without thoroughly taking into account the added terrorist threat our nation now faces," Hatch said.