From Deseret News archives:

Utah N-storage takes 2 hits

Utilities back away from PFS Skull Valley project

Published: Friday, Dec. 9, 2005 9:11 a.m. MST
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
"At least someone will be there to turn out the lights," Hatch said at a press conference in his Senate office.

Rep. Bob Bishop, R-Utah, called the announcements a "major step that it (PFS) will not be a reality."

But PFS spokeswoman Sue Martin said these announcements will hopefully not be as dire as the lawmakers said. She said financial support for the project is not limited, and any utility that would need a storage option can come forward and invest.

She said the utilities have always been signed up to invest in one phase at a time. Now that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has recommended a license for the site, it will be up to the involved utilities to make a "business decision" on whether to stay on for the construction phase. Other utilities can come in, too.

"The next phase is a whole new ball game," she said.

Margene Bullcreek, who organized Goshute opposition in Utah through her group Ohngo Gaudadeh Devia Awareness, said she's still ready to fight the NRC's decision based on environmental justice.

She calls the proposal "environmental racism" because, she said, her tribe was targeted by a large corporation "because we're supposed to be in poverty . . .

Story continues below
"It's good to know that this is happening," she said of the Xcel and Southern Co. actions. "They don't have as many utilities behind them now. . . . Now we've got five more to go."

Charles Bomberger, Xcel's general manager of nuclear assets, said that at the time the company got involved with PFS, it was facing a waste storage shortage for its Minnesota nuclear plants. State law limited how much extra storage space could be built, so the company had to find an interim storage solution because the national nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev., would not open by the time it ran out of space.

But in 2003, the state overturned the law, relieving pressure on Xcel to find another storage option.

That change, on top of Utah's continued opposition against the Skull Valley facility and a potential resolution on Yucca Mountain were all part of Xcel's reasoning in deciding to put a hold on its PFS funding, according to Bomberger.

"I think there will be a new solution coming forward, but I have no idea what it is," Bomberger said.

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.

Image
Deseret Morning News graphic

previousnext

Latest comments

I too agree that Booz and the team are NOT just going through the motions....

The springs have a long history of being clothing optional, and they provide...

Jazz manage a magical win

He "needs more outside shooting to beat LA". He needs to design a real...

BYU football: NCAA awards

NCFAA Contribution to College Football Award: LaVell Edwards, Brigham Young,...

Why did the Jazz play so bad against LA and really well for a 1/2 against...

Unga might enter NFL draft

We Coug fans will be forever grateful for your three or four years of bearing...

When was the last time Utah even got to the dance three times in a row; let...

His speech was quite good, I agree with what Gingrich said. However, for...

Utah/BYU rivalry can be more civil

I believe that a large part of the deterioration of the rivalry is a result...

Jazz manage a magical win

Good win Jazz!!! Now give Fesenko some Red Bulls and lets see how well the...

Advertisements