 |
Re: Novato unable to reach rail deal
Author: Mitsy, ESQ
Date: 10-09-2008 - 19:39
The newspaper misreported the story. Here's how it really unfolded.
1) Novato CC was warned at 6:30 before the press showed up that the
agreement with the NCRA was (a) illegal and (b) required a CEQA review.
Hence, the city could find itself sued, for violating the same law
that it claims the NCRA broke.
2) The CC then went into closed door session during which it had
decided to delay making a decision to at least October 14th.
3) Then they held a public hearing, at which one or two people who
had done some preliminary research ib the issue of transport of nuclear waste, brought up
this new issue, at least to the City council. It was NOT the reason
that the council decided to defer deciding whether to settle the
lawsuit. All speak said was that freight could transport the waste
through Sonoma and Marin and that this ought to be considered before
the CC made any decision to settle.
4) The nuclear waste transport issue hasn't been studied, but it
does relate to the transport of the spent fuel rods at the closed
PG&E plant in Humboldt. Discussion of how to transport waste to
the proposed repository at Yucca Mtn is available on DOE and State
of Nevada websites. The EIR addressing this issue identifies rail
as the most preferred mode of transfer. Yucca Mtn is a long way
from a done deal, however, given who's the Majority Leader in the
U.S. Senate.
5) It could be years and years before the rods stored in Humboldt
would be transported anywhere. Not only is there a long political
process before a repository site is selected, but there is a long
process associated with the transfer of nuclear materials.
6) Before anyone goes sounding off (either way) about this issue,
it's one of those concerns that ought to be looked at and reported
back so every one has a chance to check out what it's about. Obviously
"nuclear" is a hot word and the press picked it up, but it really was
tangential to the purpose of the hearing.
7) Based on what I witnessed (it was broadcast on Cable TV) the
basis for the CC had nothing to do with the transport of nuclear
waste. Staff wasn't even instructed to look into the matter and
report back.
Where was Mike Pechner and other freight supporters? They weren't seen
on the broadcast.
1) Novato CC was warned at 6:30 before the press showed up that the
agreement with the NCRA was (a) illegal and (b) required a CEQA review.
Hence, the city could find itself sued, for violating the same law
that it claims the NCRA broke.
2) The CC then went into closed door session during which it had
decided to delay making a decision to at least October 14th.
3) Then they held a public hearing, at which one or two people who
had done some preliminary research ib the issue of transport of nuclear waste, brought up
this new issue, at least to the City council. It was NOT the reason
that the council decided to defer deciding whether to settle the
lawsuit. All speak said was that freight could transport the waste
through Sonoma and Marin and that this ought to be considered before
the CC made any decision to settle.
4) The nuclear waste transport issue hasn't been studied, but it
does relate to the transport of the spent fuel rods at the closed
PG&E plant in Humboldt. Discussion of how to transport waste to
the proposed repository at Yucca Mtn is available on DOE and State
of Nevada websites. The EIR addressing this issue identifies rail
as the most preferred mode of transfer. Yucca Mtn is a long way
from a done deal, however, given who's the Majority Leader in the
U.S. Senate.
5) It could be years and years before the rods stored in Humboldt
would be transported anywhere. Not only is there a long political
process before a repository site is selected, but there is a long
process associated with the transfer of nuclear materials.
6) Before anyone goes sounding off (either way) about this issue,
it's one of those concerns that ought to be looked at and reported
back so every one has a chance to check out what it's about. Obviously
"nuclear" is a hot word and the press picked it up, but it really was
tangential to the purpose of the hearing.
7) Based on what I witnessed (it was broadcast on Cable TV) the
basis for the CC had nothing to do with the transport of nuclear
waste. Staff wasn't even instructed to look into the matter and
report back.
Where was Mike Pechner and other freight supporters? They weren't seen
on the broadcast.
